[opendtv] Re: Off topic: Researchers uncover potent greenhouse gas
- From: "Bob Miller" <robmxa@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:02:19 -0400
Don't like this one. They say they are nonpartisan but any
organization that gets major money from Exxon is suspect to me. Most
seem to think it is a conservative organization dedicated to fighting
the Global Warming and Peak Oil. Negative tone.
That organization that I said had some good information, The
Environmental Defense Fund, had these testimonials on their site.
"...Grade A" (highest rating of any environmental group)
- Wired Magazine.
"...America's most economically literate green campaigners"
- The Economist
"...the power broker rewarding good behavior"
- Time Magazine
"...one of the hottest environmental groups around"
- The Wall Street Journal
Gives me a warm feeling to see that the Wall Street Journal thinks they are OK.
Bob Miller
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Mark A. Aitken <maitken@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ...or how about this one?
>
> http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html
>
> On 10/28/2008 3:42 PM, Bob Miller wrote:
>
> Here is a site that has good information on Global Warming.
>
> http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=1011
>
> More inline below...
>
>
>
>
> Graig wrote
>
>
> We have been in a period of global cooling since 1998, with a rather
> dramatic drop in 2007.
>
>
> Your Global Cooling proposition is not supported by the facts as presented
> in the following NASA global mean temperature records. You simply cannot
> prove a predisposition by cherry picking data to support that position.
> The NASA records clearly show that 2007 was actually warmer than 1998.
> However, data for the first seven months of 2008 do show a relative
> cooling,
> though these cooler temperatures are still significantly warmer than the
> mean average temperature baseline. Rather than miss characterizing this as
> "Global cooling, it is best described by "the temperature rise in 2008 has
> slowed somewhat"
>
> http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts.txt
>
>
> This data is for meterological stations, not NASA satellite surface temp
> data.
>
> The meterological station data is highly suspect due to violations of the
> rules for placements of these stations. There is considerable information
> about this on the web.
>
> But this is largely irrelevant, as much of the data upon which Gore and
> others based their finding was just plain wrong, or cherry picked for
> effect.
>
> I prefer to look at historic data overall, as Easterbrook did, and to
> project based on real world data, not computer models for the future.
>
> There is nothing in the data to suggest that increased CO2 levels and
> increased temperatures in recent decades have been caused by man. There is
> considerable evidence in his paper to suggest a 40 year cycle that is linked
> in part to solar activity. Easterbrook made mincemeat of the IPCC
> predictions, which have no basis in fact.
>
>
>
> I would rather look at the opinions/conclusions of the vast majority
> of scientist and not "cherry pick" one individual like Easterbrook who
> happens to agree with what I would like to be reality. Won't matter to
> me but I have kids and I don't want to be wrong for them so that I can
> live in a fantasy world of SUVs and McMansions which are kept air
> conditioned while not occupied so that the wine won't go bad.
>
> If you have the expertise and have looked at ALL the evidence
> dispassionately and still think that there is NO Global Warming and
> that humans are not at fault then your conscience may be clean.
>
> But what if, as I said previously, humans are not at fault and there
> is Global Warming? We still will have to deal with it. There are a
> number of ways. We can ignore it and just deal with its consequences
> while using the excuse that we didn't cause it I guess.
>
> Is there someone in charge of accepting such an excuse? We could try
> to do something about it and succeed, partially succeed or fail. In my
> opinion any of the three are better than doing nothing.
>
> But if you don't believe there is any Global Warming or Cooling for
> that matter, that there is a God in charge of a world thermostat and
> he is on your side like in football and he has that thermostat set to
> a setting made just for your comfort and that it will remain at that
> setting forever then no need to worry.
>
> IMO the world could change, most likely is changing, may be changing
> because of activities of man and we better be doing our best to
> understand how it is changing and what we can do about it no matter if
> man is at fault or not. If there is a God I suggest he gave us brains
> for doing something.
>
>
>
>
> Maybe we should have been more concerned about the
> impact of sub-prime mortgages and the abuse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to
> "guarantee" these mortgages as they were proliferated as investment
> securities worldwide. But Chris Dodd and Barney Frank said there was nothing
> to worry about...
>
>
>
> Pretty hard to blame two people when most of Congress was on board
> with Fannie and Freddie and Fannie and Freddie were not at the heart
> of the current crisis. They were followers, trying to maintain market
> share, unsuccessfully I might add, by following the lead of the
> crazies on Wall Street. But they didn't originate subprime loans in
> the main, such loans just didn't meet their criteria. They did buy
> billions of $$ of the securities that were based on subprime loans
> originated by others for their own account however, dumb yes. Yes even
> very dumb but they were not the leaders or instigators and the mess we
> are in would most likely not even have happened if it were not for
> cabal of big investment banks and such as AIG that decided to sell
> naked insurance on securitized mortgages of subprime loand.
>
> The guarantees you are talking about were the Credit Default Swaps
> that were basically cheap insurance sold to back securitized mortgages
> the most toxic of which were subprime. And this "insurance" was not
> backed up by any ability to insure, no assets.
>
> But Freddie and Fannie did not sell such insurance. Lots of CDS's were
> sold on their securitized mortgages by others and that is where the
> problems are. Any sophisticated investor could buy insurance on
> Freddie and Fannie instruments even if they didn't own said
> instrument. Such insurance could also be bought an any number of
> different financial instruments having nothing to do with mortgages
>
> With Credit Default Swaps the buyer didn't have to own what he insured
> and the seller didn't have to have any assets to back up the insurance
> they sold. And now we are bailing out this INSANE casino. And the
> operators, the individuals in very many cases are walking with a lot
> of the loot. And many of the firms we are bailing out plan on paying
> hundreds of billions of dollars in bonuses this year. Go figure!!
>
> And some of them including Paulson are now in charge of fixing this.
>
> And why did such firms as AIG, Lehman and many many others offer such
> NAKED insurance? Because they could and there was no regulation saying
> they couldn't. And Paulson, then at Goldman Sachs and others were
> arguing for going ever further out on the risk curve to be
> "competitive".
>
> Now we have that fox, Paulson, trying to save the other foxes while
> all around the world we find dead chickens.
>
> Much the same in most of the Government agencies populated these last
> 8 years by Republicans.
>
> Hey I get to eat beef again if Obama is elected. Haven't had beef
> since Ann Veneman was put in charge of the Agricultural Department.
> Farmers and the cattle business represent the biggest and worst case
> of welfare voter fraud in history. Ever wonder why most of the
> Mississippi Valley is composed of red states?
>
> Bob Miller
>
>
>
>
> Looking at the current election cycle, I would have to characterize PRAVDA
> as a more believable source of information than the U.S. media...
>
>
>
> If you are watching Fox and listening to the radio yes I agree.
>
>
>
>
> Regards
> Craig
>
> Regards
> Craig
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org
>
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mark A. Aitken
> Director, Advanced Technology
> ===================================
> "What you see and hear depends a
> good deal on where you are standing;
> it also depends on what kind of a
> person you are"
>><> ~ C. S. Lewis ~ <><
>
> Things are only impossible until
> they're not.
>><> ~ J. L. Picard ~ <><
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
