Merged Global Warming Discussion II: Heated Conversation

[CapelDodger]

Cite or reference?

Anectode only, but the retreat of media from anything but the most anadoyne of references to AGW has struck me as very obvious over the last few years. This applies to denial as much as to science and evidence : it isn't worth the hassle of not including the loony-view, and it's not worth the credibility damage from including clowns. For an easier life, just don't mention it. It's not as if there isn't lots going on in the world anyway, and when stuff happens there's still the human interest angle. Context is always a minefield, regarded as best avoided at the policy-making pay-grade.

 

[CapelDodger]

This has already happened at least twice. Where a major energy company simultaneously invests in renewables and a major climate-friendly PR campaign(especially when there are tax breaks and government subsidies available) while also pumping funding into the deniosphere.

Tiny amounts invested (relatively speaking) with no follow-up, big PR, dies an unmourned death in a few years, and career-suicide for all involved.

Anectodatal again, but I have experience of the oil industry at the suit-wearing level, where it's hard work to get an invoice settled in 90 days let alone the contracted 30. The culture rules, not reason, and that culture will go over the cliff with them. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but one day ...

Than culture is cynical; not the good cynical, like I've got, but blinkered idiot cynicism. I took the money but not the culture.

The weirdest thing was the penny-pinching, despite the vast sums flowing in. Careers are built on getting things done cheap, not clever. Slow payment of suppliers to skim a fraction more interest on cash just because they could was just a symptom; so was BP's Gulf disaster and Shell's fiasco in the Arctic. No lessons will be learned.

 

[CapelDodger]

I think they as a corporation is out of it....might be lots of private funding but Heartland is bleeding big time.
It's a complete waste of their money at this point in time.

After the billboard fiasco Heatland set up a specifically anti-renewables division, leaving AGW denial to coast along with a crew of no-hopers and true believers. It was a defining moment to my mind. The moment when nobody who wished to move in polite society would admit to ever having knowingly associated with an AGW denier.

Poor Arnold; a no-hoper and a true believer, and not getting paid for either.

 

[Trakar]

Anectode only, but the retreat of media from anything but the most anadoyne of references to AGW has struck me as very obvious over the last few years. This applies to denial as much as to science and evidence : it isn't worth the hassle of not including the loony-view, and it's not worth the credibility damage from including clowns. For an easier life, just don't mention it. It's not as if there isn't lots going on in the world anyway, and when stuff happens there's still the human interest angle. Context is always a minefield, regarded as best avoided at the policy-making pay-grade.

All I've seen on the flip side radar lately, is talk and attempts from the usual suspects to get rid of the CRTC. I don't normally track all the political across the/any border, it takes too much time to try to keep up with the political stuff around here. The "balance" in the states isn't governmentally ordained, just greedy media more interested in controversy than journalism.

Tiny amounts invested (relatively speaking) with no follow-up, big PR, dies an unmourned death in a few years, and career-suicide for all involved.

Anectodatal again, but I have experience of the oil industry at the suit-wearing level, where it's hard work to get an invoice settled in 90 days let alone the contracted 30. The culture rules, not reason, and that culture will go over the cliff with them. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but one day ...

From your keyboard to the weavings of the Fates!

The weirdest thing was the penny-pinching, despite the vast sums flowing in. Careers are built on getting things done cheap, not clever. Slow payment of suppliers to skim a fraction more interest on cash just because they could was just a symptom; so was BP's Gulf disaster and Shell's fiasco in the Arctic. No lessons will be learned.

That's the nature of business
the reason regulation
and effective regulation enforcement
are an essential element of government.
Now, if we could just elect an effective government.

After the billboard fiasco Heatland set up a specifically anti-renewables division, leaving AGW denial to coast along with a crew of no-hopers and true believers. It was a defining moment to my mind. The moment when nobody who wished to move in polite society would admit to ever having knowingly associated with an AGW denier.

Poor Arnold; a no-hoper and a true believer, and not getting paid for either.

Most of the people who espouse these beliefs seem to have a pretty healthy disdain for "polite society," it's only fair that feeling is reciprocated.

Most are more likely bored contrarians, rather than the "in the wool" ideologues they affect on the internet.

 

[Arnold Martin]

Obama has correctly targetted coal and has made progress.


A denier might sit here and play stupid about reality...

.

If Obama targets coal how is he going to charge the batteries in all the electric cars he said would save the planet ? What happened to all the Chevy Volts that Presidential Motors was going to sell ?? Nobody wanted them, Right ?

Know why ? .. Even fools like me know it takes 400-500 pounds of battery to equal the energy in one gallon of gasoline. And fools like me know that in the USA it will be a coal fired plant that produces the electricity to charge the battery.

And you call me "stupid about reality" . ?

Not only that , the electrical grid sometimes runs at maximum today without having half the population plugging in electric cars powered by a coal plant.

Not only that , to manufacture batteries you need a case of dynamite to blast a mine and a smokestack and a barrel of oil to build the darn thing.

You Mr Mac should know that better than anyone .... look at the jeopardy Ontario has placed itself in by listening to the warming propaganda thinking the wind and a solar panel would save the world. Some bad decisions were made.

Why do we not discuss how the IPCC and its "scientists" have mislead people using scare tactics.

Sorry to be so critical , but what I am saying is reality , it is not "stupid"

No science was harmed in the manufacture of this post.

Thank you

 

[Arnold Martin]

Your metaphysical defences are impenetrable.

My defenses are impenetrable but they are not metaphysical. They are based on reality

 

[Arnold Martin]

Anectode only, but the retreat of media from anything but the most anadoyne of references to AGW has struck me as very obvious over the last few years. This applies to denial as much as to science and evidence : it isn't worth the hassle of not including the loony-view, and it's not worth the credibility damage from including clowns. For an easier life, just don't mention it. It's not as if there isn't lots going on in the world anyway, and when stuff happens there's still the human interest angle. Context is always a minefield, regarded as best avoided at the policy-making pay-grade.

Agreed , thank you.

 

[macdoc]

edit - no science was used in the manufacture of your post nor any facts.

Coal has been phased out in Ontario in 2014 that's a good thing.
People can easily save any electricity increases....pity the poor - what a load of crap.
The poor have a protected rate.

Hybrid sales world wide are climbing

Hybrid electric vehicle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_electric_vehicle‎
Jump to Sales and rankings - [edit]. As of September 2013, about 6.8 million hybrid electric vehicles have been sold worldwide since their inception in ...

Electric Vehicles Speeding Toward 7% Of All Global Sales By 2020
cleantechnica.com/.../electric-vehicles-speeding-toward-7-global-sales-20...‎
Sep 30, 2013 - Navigant Research forecasts electric vehicles will reach 6.6 million in annual sales and 7% of the global light-duty vehicle market by 2020.

European fleet mpg is 55 versus 25 in the US...how backwards ...I drive in Europe farther for less in a high end desiel SUV that was way more comfortable than the gas burner rented in LA.

You just regurgitate all the failed right wing memes....amusing here in a science thread.

You are pushing a dead end idea that even Exxon has moved beyond ...the world is moving on....extinction event for climate deniers...

 

[Arnold Martin]

Cite or reference?

I was involved in that , I have about 100 pieces of correspondence between myself , the CRTC , the CBC Ombudsman etc. It is all on my other computer

As a public broadcaster they were not being objective , the reporting itself was biased , but the larger issue was the extreme moderation of readers comments.

Comments were deleted on a regular basis if they did not fit the "party line" of the political left , or the party line of the IPCC warming mongers.

It is a big file , in summary it was shown that the CBC catered mainly to the 14% of the Canadians on the very left ...

I wanted to put the CBC in front of the CRTC to give an accounting of themselves.

They chickened out and made some improvements .... but mainly dropped all the one sided warming propaganda.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

I was involved in that , I have about 100 pieces of correspondence between myself , the CRTC , the CBC Ombudsman etc. It is all on my other computer

As a public broadcaster they were not being objective , the reporting itself was biased , but the larger issue was the extreme moderation of readers comments.

Comments were deleted on a regular basis if they did not fit the "party line" of the political left , or the party line of the IPCC warming mongers.

It is a big file , in summary it was shown that the CBC catered mainly to the 14% of the Canadians on the very left ...

I wanted to put the CBC in front of the CRTC to give an accounting of themselves.

They chickened out and made some improvements .... but mainly dropped all the one sided warming propaganda.

You do know that sometimes a political ideology may latch onto a new concept or new understanding of the world we live in faster than another political ideology. Especially if that new understanding has social and political ramifications.

However, when this happens it is important to objectively analyze the new information instead of becoming mired in political dogma. There probably was a time that the concept of AGW was in fact a "feel good" view held by the far left because it fit with their political ideology and agenda. That time has long passed. No doubt the far left will continue to use the information to promote their ideology, but whether they do or not has little to do with whether AGW exists or not.

A much better political strategy for anyone not agreeing with the political ideology of the far left is to develop a way to incorporate this new information about AGW into the framework of their political agenda instead of becoming mired in dogma.

However, no matter which side of the political isle you are on, the climate doesn't care. It has no "thoughts" on the matter, and is warming the planet equally for both the left and the right.

So if you have a problem with the way the left has latched onto the issue, make a mitigation plan that fits your ideology, don't just stick your head in the sand and pretend AGW doesn't exist. That's foolishness. That's how you loose political influence, not gain it.

 

[Arnold Martin]

Coal has been phased out in Ontario in 2014 that's a good thing.
People can easily save any electricity increases....pity the poor - what a load of crap.
The poor have a protected rate.

European fleet mpg is 55 versus 25 in the US...how backwards ...I drive in Europe farther for less in a high end desiel SUV that was way more comfortable than the gas burner rented in LA.

..

---Dirty coal fired plants should be replaced ... but with what ?? .... and replacement energy should be in place before the old ones were shut down , that was my point

--- the poor have a protected rate ??? ... all that means is somebody is subsidizing them... and that would be me and you.

--- I have been driving VW diesels since 1981 .... 60 mpg .... down to 55 mpg in the winter. I do my part. I also have Volvos and a Cadillac Eldorado Barritz with the 500 cubic inch engine .... dont drive it much but it actually gets up to 23 mpg in good conditions.

Hybrids are excellent for short city commutes , especially if charged by renewables ... but you need Hydro-electric dams for that ... which Europe is lacking.

But more electrics are not the answer. Stop and think for a minute how much infrastructure it would take if even half our cars were electrics ... it is mind boggling , and what fuel do we use to produce the electricity , picture the mountains of batteries required to power them for 7 years ... then move the mountain of dead batteries to the junk yard and build a fresh mountain to put in the cars for another 7 years.

It takes a lot of energy to manufacture and charge batteries , and the reward is a small amount of power for a short time. Fossil fuels are still the best source of energy by a long shot. It is cheap and there is lots of it.

The city dweller thinks his electrical outlet is something pure and plentiful , but he has been mislead.

Quebec and Manitoba have abundant water powered Hydro resources .... but it cost billions to build the dams .... billions for the power lines ... and you have to cut down lots of forest for the right of ways.

Solar is a joke and the industry has collapsed the minute the govt money was consumed , wind does not blow when it is very hot or very cold ... the times when power is needed the most.

Ironically the best places to use wind generators are areas with abundant hydro (water) powered generating stations ... when the wind blows we can close the flow of water at the dams and "bank" it for use on the days wind is not blowing ... it is a seamless system that compliments itself. .... but the turbines are very expensive , they have life limits , and they are killing thousands of birds as we speak

Notice the CBC never reports that ?? .. they just keep showing those same three oil covered ducks from the tailing ponds of the Alberta oil sands..... why is that ? ... talk about blatant bias and denial ... !!!

Any elementary science student has known these things for years and years .... but based on the IPCC scare tactics we still had to waste billions of dollars of government subsidies to prove it was not practical

I do not require a science degree to understand these elementary truths

My issue is trying to get the warmist scientist to agree .... but they are all just a bunch of deniers.

I am thankful to be able to express my views here without censorship.

 

[Trakar]

I was involved in that , I have about 100 pieces of correspondence between myself , the CRTC , the CBC Ombudsman etc. It is all on my other computer

As a public broadcaster they were not being objective , the reporting itself was biased , but the larger issue was the extreme moderation of readers comments.

Comments were deleted on a regular basis if they did not fit the "party line" of the political left , or the party line of the IPCC warming mongers.

It is a big file , in summary it was shown that the CBC catered mainly to the 14% of the Canadians on the very left ...

I wanted to put the CBC in front of the CRTC to give an accounting of themselves.

They chickened out and made some improvements .... but mainly dropped all the one sided warming propaganda.

Heresay, do you have any verifiable, independent support for your assertions?

 

[DC]

Fair enough DC but you avoid fundamental questions also .... you try to hide behind stacks of "science"

Folks like you have tunnel vision (not always a bad thing) ... but when the planet does not obey your models you blame it on me not answering your questions.

Think about that for a minute.

Neither you nor I can predict the future , but what if the next 30 years sees a cooling trend ... what will we blame that on ??

What if it is simply good old mother earth doing what it has always done for thousands of years . I suspect it is , with maybe a small influence from burning fossil fuels.

lol hiding behind science? it is a scientific topic.

the models did a very good job. the IPCC projections are pretty much spot on, wich shows how good the models are.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/7/4/044035/article

its very unlikely we will see planet earth cooling for a good while.

we still have an imbalance of incoming and outgoing eadiation.

the planet is still warming up as is best seen in the OHC.

you may be ignorant about the forcing on our climate system, scientist lucky enough are not so ignorant and choose to research the climate system and not simply think " oh well, mother nature does its thing"

got any science?

 

[Trakar]

---Dirty coal fired plants should be replaced ... but with what ?? .... and replacement energy should be in place before the old ones were shut down , that was my point

--- the poor have a protected rate ??? ... all that means is somebody is subsidizing them... and that would be me and you.

--- I have been driving VW diesels since 1981 .... 60 mpg .... down to 55 mpg in the winter. I do my part. I also have Volvos and a Cadillac Eldorado Barritz with the 500 cubic inch engine .... dont drive it much but it actually gets up to 23 mpg in good conditions.

Hybrids are excellent for short city commutes , especially if charged by renewables ... but you need Hydro-electric dams for that ... which Europe is lacking.

But more electrics are not the answer. Stop and think for a minute how much infrastructure it would take if even half our cars were electrics ... it is mind boggling , and what fuel do we use to produce the electricity , picture the mountains of batteries required to power them for 7 years ... then move the mountain of dead batteries to the junk yard and build a fresh mountain to put in the cars for another 7 years.

It takes a lot of energy to manufacture and charge batteries , and the reward is a small amount of power for a short time. Fossil fuels are still the best source of energy by a long shot. It is cheap and there is lots of it.

The city dweller thinks his electrical outlet is something pure and plentiful , but he has been mislead.

Quebec and Manitoba have abundant water powered Hydro resources .... but it cost billions to build the dams .... billions for the power lines ... and you have to cut down lots of forest for the right of ways.

Solar is a joke and the industry has collapsed the minute the govt money was consumed , wind does not blow when it is very hot or very cold ... the times when power is needed the most.

Ironically the best places to use wind generators are areas with abundant hydro (water) powered generating stations ... when the wind blows we can close the flow of water at the dams and "bank" it for use on the days wind is not blowing ... it is a seamless system that compliments itself. .... but the turbines are very expensive , they have life limits , and they are killing thousands of birds as we speak

Notice the CBC never reports that ?? .. they just keep showing those same three oil covered ducks from the tailing ponds of the Alberta oil sands..... why is that ? ... talk about blatant bias and denial ... !!!

Any elementary science student has known these things for years and years .... but based on the IPCC scare tactics we still had to waste billions of dollars of government subsidies to prove it was not practical

I do not require a science degree to understand these elementary truths

My issue is trying to get the warmist scientist to agree .... but they are all just a bunch of deniers.

I am thankful to be able to express my views here without censorship.

Beyond the unoriginal, foundationless rhetoric that composes most of your post, there are many options to be explored and discussed, and there are many paths toward achieving the goals of cutting our society's contribution to the problem.

With regards to fossil fuels:
In the short term, natgas turbine systems are preferable to any form of coal or fossil oil, in the more intermediate range, advanced design nuclear is inevitable and regional mixes of renewable/alternative systems will fill ever larger percentages of our energy needs. We may never move entirely away from carbon fuels, there are some purposes for which they are particularly well-suited, and at a low enough usage the emissions aren't a significant problem.

We don't need to be using fossil fuels to generate grid electricity and we need to get alternative options for the vast majority of our transportation needs.



I would be happy to support these considerations with specific references and citations, if there is any real interest in moving beyond the caterwauling and actually discuss reasoned and reasonable considerations of how to move forward with regards to policy.

 

[Arnold Martin]

Cite or reference?

If you had read my post carefully it said I have extensive documentation on my other computer. It is correspondence between myself and crown corporations and ruling media regulators (CRTC)

It was not intended for public discussion , it was intended for a tribunal hearing. I will not post personal emails from civil servants who were simply doing their jobs .

But I will give you one example.... Al Gore visited a Saskatchewan Canada university and gave his climate scare film and speech .... I drove there in my 60 mpg VW diesel , He flew there in a gas guzzling Boeing 747 that holds 225,000 liters of jet fuel , he demanded and was paid $100,000 for his "speech" ... used 5-7 limousines for him and his entourage and left them all running outside so they would be warm when for the trip back to the airport.

CBC Cameras were there recording everything .... afterward there was plenty of back and forth questions from the audience (mostly University students) ... when the CBC did the TV coverage of the event they included every single audience query that favored the Warming agenda .... and left out every single query that questioned it .... I am talking about intelligent questions from professors and students .

My petition to the CRTC was simple and to the point ... as a public broadcaster who receives billions in taxpayer funds , and constantly proclaims to represent the views of all Canadians , why did they edit out 50% of the content.

The CBC gave their standard reply of being "fair and balanced"

The CRTC asked me for proof

I sent them my video tape of the whole event

The top CBC hierarchy immediately contacted me and said they would look into it immediately and report back

To (her) credit she replied within 3 days and admitted the extreme bias of the CBC crew and had instructed them to change.

I had rattled their cages and that was the whole intent.

Somebody had to .... why did it have to be me , an unwashed uneducated helicopter pilot on the Canadian Prairies ??.

 

[Trakar]

If you had read my post carefully it said I have extensive documentation on my other computer. It is correspondence between myself and crown corporations and ruling media regulators (CRTC)

It was not intended for public discussion , it was intended for a tribunal hearing. I will not post personal emails from civil servants who were simply doing their jobs ...

If it was not for discussion, why are you discussing it? That alone calls into question your ethical standards at the very least.

I was looking for a confirming link to a public acknowledgement confirming your assertion that:

The CRTC slapped their wrists because of that and gave them the warning to report on all sides of the issue. But rather than comply they pretty much dropped the whole topic except what comes through AP or Reuters etc.

If you are going to use this purported incident as support for your statements then it is incumbent upon you to provide an independently verifiable means of confirming the veracity of your account. If you can not, or will not, provide such a citation or independent link, then it provides no support for your assertions.

Anyone can assert whatever they can imagine, but without reputable, independent verification, it might as well be just so many pipe-dreams.

 

[DC]

If you had read my post carefully it said I have extensive documentation on my other computer. It is correspondence between myself and crown corporations and ruling media regulators (CRTC)

It was not intended for public discussion , it was intended for a tribunal hearing. I will not post personal emails from civil servants who were simply doing their jobs .

But I will give you one example.... Al Gore visited a Saskatchewan Canada university and gave his climate scare film and speech .... I drove there in my 60 mpg VW diesel , He flew there in a gas guzzling Boeing 747 that holds 225,000 liters of jet fuel , he demanded and was paid $100,000 for his "speech" ... used 5-7 limousines for him and his entourage and left them all running outside so they would be warm when for the trip back to the airport.

CBC Cameras were there recording everything .... afterward there was plenty of back and forth questions from the audience (mostly University students) ... when the CBC did the TV coverage of the event they included every single audience query that favored the Warming agenda .... and left out every single query that questioned it .... I am talking about intelligent questions from professors and students .

My petition to the CRTC was simple and to the point ... as a public broadcaster who receives billions in taxpayer funds , and constantly proclaims to represent the views of all Canadians , why did they edit out 50% of the content.

The CBC gave their standard reply of being "fair and balanced"

The CRTC asked me for proof

I sent them my video tape of the whole event

The top CBC hierarchy immediately contacted me and said they would look into it immediately and report back

To (her) credit she replied within 3 days and admitted the extreme bias of the CBC crew and had instructed them to change.

I had rattled their cages and that was the whole intent.

Somebody had to .... why did it have to be me , an unwashed uneducated helicopter pilot on the Canadian Prairies ??.

sure

 

[Arnold Martin]

If it was not for discussion, why are you discussing it? That alone calls into question your ethical standards at the very least.

I was looking for a confirming link to a public acknowledgement confirming your assertion that:



If you are going to use this purported incident as support for your statements then it is incumbent upon you to provide an independently verifiable means of confirming the veracity of your account. If you can not, or will not, provide such a citation or independent link, then it provides no support for your assertions.

Anyone can assert whatever they can imagine, but without reputable, independent verification, it might as well be just so many pipe-dreams.

Take a step backwards and read how I was slammed because I quoted the Toronto Sun news source. Somebody else started it , not me,

My point was I do not worship at the altar of CBC because their opinions are completely biased .... you on the other hand would love them , they say what you want to hear and will make you feel good.

If the CBC was a private entity I would have no complaint.

But they could not fly on their own dime without taxpayer subsidies. (News wise) the CBC is not in my camp .... but I am forced to pay for it .

Just like I will be forced to send carbon credits to third world dictators if the warmists had their way.

I dislike it severely when people put their hands in my pockets for my hard earned money and yet hate me at the same time

Will you allow me to dip into your wallet to fund my denier regime ? ... Will you let me decide how much energy you can or cannot consume ?


I hope your answer is no , and I hope you will let me say no to the folks who wish to run my agenda.

 

[lionking]

My point was I do not worship at the altar of CBC because their opinions are completely biased .... you on the other hand would love them , they say what you want to hear and will make you feel good.

I've never watched CBC. Who has been brainwashing me?

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Just like I will be forced to send carbon credits to third world dictators if the warmists had their way.

Maybe not. Everyone assumes the USA and Canada and other industrialized nations will be forced to pay, but we have yet to commit full resources to that dynamic. I would suspect that it could be possible to force the Dictators to send money our way or face sanctions. When we put our mind to it, and real money is at stake, I would not bet against it.