Replies

The greens want the American people to pay an extraordinary price for carbon-based energy.

More tax on energy, my electric bill doubled last month already for no apparent reason!

“It was especially interesting for me to see how little expenditure it requires to lead credulous humanity around by the nose.” Albert Einstein ... From “The Warburgs” by Ron Chernow, page 283

One of the biggest problems we ‘deniers’ face is that few real facts are ever given by the AGW crowd. This is intentional, of course. For instance, they throw around labels like ‘green’ and ‘clean’ but never define them. It can be demonstrated that the atmosphere is ‘cleaner’ today that it has been in decades (in the U.S.), if not centuries (parts of Europe). How can something like CO2, necessary for life itself, be labeled ‘dirty’? It boggles the mind.

I’ve come up with (what I think is) a simple, understandable-by-anyone concept to explain why folks should stop being ‘afraid’ of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere.

Here’s the line of thinking:

Question1:
What are the molecules that compose air? Name them in order of most-to-least abundant. [By the way, few folks will get any of this right without looking it up.]

Answer:
Nitrogen, Oxygen, Water, Argon, Carbon Dioxide, and Other.

Question2:
If you take a random (or average) sampling of 10,000 molecules of air and assume that each molecule is worth a penny, approximately how much would each of the different components of the air be worth?

(Note: 10,000 pennies is the same as $100.00. If you couch the discussion in dollars and cents rather than, say, PPM - folks will have an easier time grasping the numbers. Even a second grader understands completely the difference between a $20. bill and 4 pennies.)

Answer:
Nitrogen: $77.00
Oxygen: $20.00 (animals NEED this to live)
Water: $ 2.00 (this is the ‘real’ GHG)
Argon: $ 0.95 (that’s right, 25x the amount of CO2)
CO2: 4 cents (plants NEED this to live)
Other: 1 penny

Question3:
As you’ve heard, Humans have pumped MASSIVE amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, yet it only makes up 4 cents of the entire $100.00 of the atmosphere. (That’s 4 CO2 molecules per 10,000 air molecules). How much of these 4 cents worth of CO2 has been added by Humans?

Answer:
1 penny. (280ppm to 380ppm)

Question4:
Let’s say that Humans had subtracted a penny’s worth of CO2 from the $100.00 worth of our entire atmosphere, instead of adding CO2. Would there be any impact?

Answer:
Plants would be severly impacted and dying.

There are many more points that can be made, you get the idea. Feel free to steal the concept, if you find it useful...

from the article:
Suddenly it is not so fashionable to save the planet. It may become more important to restore economic growth than to strangle energy output.
It’s simple, really. If financial capital was the lifeblood of the economy, energy is its food. And without it, or if it costs too much, nations the world over would be unable to sustain their peoples. The American people were given a powerful lesson on what energy price shocks can feel like this past summer, and they will not be eager to pay that price again.

This assumes that the new administration, the Dems in the congress and the propaganda ministry (what we used to call the media) want economic growth.

Unfortunately, they don't want economic growth. They want "green jobs" and they want to "save the planet" from "anthropogenic climate change."

It's about power for them. It's not about growth, economics, science or even the real world environment. If we were actually allowed to produce our way to economic growth, we wouldn't need their nanny state to take care of us. Besides, they can always blame the economic mess on Bush for at least the next 3 years or so (maybe more).

We could put thousands to work immediately, and make lots of money selling our oil and coal on world markets. It won't happen because the Democrats would rather "save the planet" than grow the economy. And the believe they have a "mandate" from the election results.

This quote from an environmentalist shows why global warming is still being pushed by the government despite evidence against it:

“Yes, the survival of the species takes precedence over strict adherence to the Constitution...”

His answer to the question “Does global warming justify the government taking on powers and authority not granted to it by the Constitution?”

Big Brother sees global warming and the alleged threat to humanity as a way around the Constitution, plain and simple.