EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Fri Dec 14, 2018 4:49 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1321 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 85, 86, 87, 88, 89  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 7:31 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21275
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Good news fence sitters. Good news indeed.

https://www.thegwpf.com/its-roll-back-t ... subsidies/

Quote:
Date: 04/07/18 Toronto Sun
Ontario Premier Doug Ford on Tuesday cancelled what amounts to a $2 billion a year tax on Ontarians by scrapping all of the government subsidy programs funded by former premier Kathleen Wynne’s cap-and-trade scheme.


Quote:
Cap and trade, a carbon tax by another name, raises prices on goods and services rather than the taxes on them.

“Every cent from the cap-and-trade slush fund is money that has been taken out of the pockets of Ontario families and businesses,” Ford said in a written statement, adding he was fulfilling his election promise to scrap the Liberals’ “cash grab” designed to fund “big government programs” that “do nothing for the environment.”

“We believe that this money belongs back in the pockets of people,” Ford said. “Cancelling the cap-and-trade carbon tax will result in lower prices at the gas pump, on your home heating bills and on virtually every other product you buy.”

Ford cited a 2016 report by Auditor General Bonnie Lysyk which concluded that despite its $8-billion price tag from 2017 to 2020, Wynne’s cap-and-trade scheme would not significantly lower Ontario’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Ford’s cancellation of Wynne’s Climate Action Plan that was to spend $8.3 billion over five years from cap-and-trade revenues, means the cancellation of everything from government subsidies of up to $14,000 for people who buy electric cars, to some public transit projects.

Ford said his government will honour arrangements, orders and contracts that have already been signed for things like energy efficient insulation and window retrofits, but all other initiatives will only be funded on a case-by-case basis from general tax revenues, after the PCs complete their value-for-money audit of Ontario’s finances.



Rolling in the right direction. =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>


Only if you are a fool or are only interested in making money from your fossil fuel investments ... or both.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 8:37 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/14/ ... d-bribery/

Quote:
An attorney who won an $8.6 billion award in an Ecuadoran court against Chevron Corp. over pollution of the Amazon rain forest later found to be obtained by coercion, fraud and bribery has lost his law license.

Steven Donziger is suspended from practicing law in New York state until further notice based on findings made in March 2014 by a federal trial court, a New York appeals court said July 10.

The 2014 findings of U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan are “uncontroverted evidence of serious professional misconduct which immediately threatens the public interest,” the appeals court said.



Cheat to win. Not because they are good at it. Because that's the only way they can win. :shock:

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 12:32 am 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
A half a million hits. Holy crap fence sitters, and we're only getting started.

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:21 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
Its all about the money fence sitters.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/09/09/ ... ree-stuff/

Quote:
Despite the overall failure to achieve their stated goals, the now concluded Bangkok climate conference actually made some progress – they all agreed to jointly attack the USA for not providing all the climate cash and free technology transfers demanded by delegates.


Don't let anyone convince you of anything different. Follow the money.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:35 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21275
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Its all about the money fence sitters.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/09/09/ ... ree-stuff/

Quote:
Despite the overall failure to achieve their stated goals, the now concluded Bangkok climate conference actually made some progress – they all agreed to jointly attack the USA for not providing all the climate cash and free technology transfers demanded by delegates.


Don't let anyone convince you of anything different. Follow the money.


Another earth shattering article from the same source ......

https://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/0 ... eing-told/


The Truth About An AIDS Cure Is Out There: Why Aren’t We Being Told?

by ERIC WORRALL

There is a cure for AIDS. I know, this claim sounds crazy – but its been tested, and, at least on a small scale experimental level, it appears to work. The principle is sound.

So why doesn’t everyone know about it?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:10 am 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
Coming to a theatre near you fence sitters.

https://www.thegwpf.com/47549-2/

Quote:
n April, civil-rights groups sued to stop some of California’s policies designed to address climate change. Then on Monday, California governor Jerry Brown signed into law SB 100, which requires the state’s utilities to obtain all their electricity from carbon-free sources by 2045. Before signing the bill, Brown said the legislation was “sending a message to California and to the world that we’re going to meet the Paris agreement.” In fact, it will only increase the hardships that California’s climate policy imposes on the poor, as detailed in the lawsuit.

High electricity prices should be a concern for California policymakers, since electric rates in the state are already 60 percent higher than those in the rest of the country. According to a recent study by the Berkeley-based think tank Environmental Progress, between 2011 and 2017 California’s electricity rates rose more than five times as fast as those in the rest of the U.S. SB 100 will mean even higher electricity prices for Californians.


Quote:
In addition to cost, the all-renewable push set forth in SB 100 faces huge challenges with regard to energy storage. Relying solely on renewables will require a battery system large enough to handle massive seasonal fluctuations in wind and solar output. (Wind-energy and solar-energy production in California is roughly three times as great during the summer months as it is in the winter.) According to the Clean Air Task Force, a Boston-based energy-policy think tank, for California to get 80 percent of its electricity from renewables would require about 9.6 terawatt-hours of storage. This would require about 500 million Tesla Powerwalls, or roughly 15 Powerwalls for every resident. A full 100 percent–renewable electricity mandate would require some 36.3 terawatt-hours of storage, or about 60 Powerwalls for every resident of California.

Increasing reliance on renewable energy also means increasing land-use conflicts. Since 2015, more than 200 government entities from Maine to California have voted to reject or restrict the encroachment of wind-energy projects. In 2015 the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously in favor of an ordinance banning large wind turbines in the county’s unincorporated areas. Three other California counties — San Diego, Solano, and Inyo — have also passed restrictions on Big Wind. Last year, the head of the California Wind Energy Association lamented that “we’re facing restrictions like that all around the state,” adding that “it’s pretty bleak in terms of the potential for new development.” The result of the anti-wind restrictions can be seen in the numbers. Last year, California had about 5,600 megawatts of installed wind capacity. That’s roughly 150 megawatts less than what the state had back in 2013.


Quote:
Even before SB 100 passed, though, California’s leaders were already facing a legal backlash from minority leaders over the high cost of the state’s climate policies. On April 27, The Two Hundred, a coalition of civil-rights leaders, filed a lawsuit in state court against the California Air Resources Board, seeking an injunction against some of the state’s carbon dioxide–reduction rules. The 102-page lawsuit declares that California’s “reputation as a global climate leader is built on the state’s dual claims of substantially reducing greenhouse gas emissions while simultaneously enjoying a thriving economy. Neither claim is true.”

The gist of the lawsuit is this: California’s high housing, transportation, and energy costs are discriminatory because they are a regressive tax on the poor. The suit claims that the state’s climate laws violate the Fair Employment and Housing Act because CARB’s new greenhouse-gas-emissions rules on housing units in the state “have a disparate negative impact on minority communities and are discriminatory against minority communities and their members.” The suit also claims the state’s climate laws are illegal under the Federal Housing Act, again because their effect is felt predominantly by minority communities. It also makes a constitutional claim that minorities are being denied equal protection under the law because California’s climate regulations are making affordable housing unavailable to them.



California trying to bring Eupopean style energy poverty to the United States.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:40 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
Well, this should be fun.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/09/19/ ... -imminent/

Quote:
Climategate continues: Release of University of Arizona Climate Emails Imminent
Anthony Watts / 6 hours ago September 19, 2018
Press Release

Nearly seven years ago, on December 7th, 2011, the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic’s (FME Law) sought public records from the University of Arizona related to the Mann-Bradley-Hughes temperature reconstruction that looks like a hockey stick, and development of an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. They refused much of the request and FME Law sued. Now (on September 18th, 2018) legal counsel for the University informed FME Law that they were done, that they would be withdrawing their appeal of the trial court’s decision, end the case and disclose the records.

Included in the release will be emails that, for example, provide the full context of the discussions between Michael Mann and colleagues and Chick Keller on whether there was a medieval warm period and a little ice age. Mann, Bradley and Hughes (MBH) were the authors of the “hockey stick” graph that became the icon of climate alarmism. Dr. Keller was, at the time, Director of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at the Los Alamos National Lab and affiliated with the University of California at San Diego, and wanted to reconcile data which appeared to refute the MBH papers. Also within this collection will be the full discussion on events surrounding an effort to remove editors of journals willing to publish peer-reviewed papers that contradicted the MBH and related papers on which climate alarmism was built. This collection of emails is particularly important in that they will provide the full context of Climategate emails that have been described as “cherry picking.”

The University lost its case in the trial court almost exactly two years ago. On on September 19th, 2016, the Honorable James Marner ruled

“[the University] has not met its burden justifying its decision to withhold the subject emails. In making this finding, the Court does not ignore the repeated “chilling effect” concerns raised in the affidavits and in the pleadings. However, the Court concludes that this potential harm is speculative at best, and does not overcome the presumption favoring disclosure of public records containing information about a topic as important and far-reaching as global warming and its potential causes.

Nearly a year later, on November 30th, 2017 and after a third trip to the Appellate Court, Judge Marner clarified and reaffirmed his decision. The University again appealed. FME Law, however, was unwilling to wait further. Under Arizona law, FME Law was allowed to obtain the climate science emails it sought, despite the appeal. Nearly seven months ago, on February 26th, 2018, trial Judge Marner ordered the University to release of the documents, giving the University 90 days to disclose the documents in a word-searchable and easily readable form.

Three days before the deadline, the University filed a motion asking the trial court to “stay” the disclosure of the public records while they appealed the case. In a 13-word decision, the trial court found “the requested relief is not warranted.” The University again appealed, seeking a stay of the disclosure from the Appellate Court until their appeal of the underlying case was concluded. Six days after FME filed its response, the Appellate Court issued a seven-word decision: “Motion for Stay Pending Appeal is DENIED.”

Again, the University appealed, asking the Arizona Supreme Court to stay disclosure pending its appeal on the underlying legal issues. On August 29th, 2018, the Supreme Court rendered its decision: “Motion for Stay of Release of Records Pending Conclusion of Appeal = DENIED.” Neither appellate court provided a discussion on the basis of their decisions.

The appellate decisions that required disclosure of the climate scientists’ emails signaled that the University was not going to prevail on its arguments before these appellate courts with regard as to whether they should, as a matter of law, be allowed to avoid their duty to disclose these public records. As Dr. David Schnare, the member-manager of the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic, PLLC, who prosecuted this case, explains, “For the University, it was the end of a very long road. Their legal counsel, Michael Mandig, has informed me they would be withdrawing their notice of appeal and would work with us on completing the disclosure of the records.”

Dr. Schnare also noted, “While this was a long and arduous path through the various courts, I join in the comments of Judge Marner that the professionalism of counsel for the University was exemplary and I have the highest respect for his efforts and legal acumen.”

Others who attempted to intercede in these proceedings have labeled FME Law’s request harassment, an argument the Courts heard and to which they found no need to respond. Instead, as trial Judge Marner made clear, the subjects of the public records address an important topic at issue in the public forum. Dr. Schnare explained, “We did not take this case only to obtain the history of a very controversial period of time in the climate wars. We also took this case to cast sunlight on how public universities work, how they contribute to the formation of public policy, and how professors behave within the policy arena.”

What remains is for the University to hand over the documents they improperly withheld and do so in the manner the Court directed – word searchable and easily readable. This will not be easy to do. While Professor Hughes’ emails are in an acceptable form, those of Professor Overpeck are not. There are over 90,000 pages of Overpeck material yet to be disclosed. To place this in perspective, the University’s original and voluntary disclosure consisted of 2,438 pages.

Once available, Dr. Schnare and his colleagues will take the first look at those documents. With a doctorate in environmental management and decades of experience in policy formation, he and others under his supervision will sort these documents, organize them for use by the public and prepare a report on what they contain – so to speak, a chronicle of that historic time, based the full history of that period as available in this public record. Dr. Schnare has been adamant that, unlike publication and discussion of the Climategate release of documents, FME Law’s examination and report will reflect the full context of the emails and will take careful steps to prevent “cherry picking,” especially for emails that, if not presented in context, would improperly harm the reputation of and proper respect for Professors Hughes and Overpeck, as well as their many correspondents.

FME Law is a 501(c)(3) public charity dedicated as a pro-environmental legal presence that represents clients seeking to hold state and federal governments to the ethical and legal requirements that protects and enhances free market environmentalism.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:25 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21275
Location: Southeastern US
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... are_btn_tw

Shell and Exxon's secret 1980s climate change warnings
Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products.

One day in 1961, an American economist named Daniel Ellsberg stumbled across a piece of paper with apocalyptic implications. Ellsberg, who was advising the US government on its secret nuclear war plans, had discovered a document that contained an official estimate of the death toll in a preemptive “first strike” on China and the Soviet Union: 300 million in those countries, and double that globally.

Ellsberg was troubled that such a plan existed; years later, he tried to leak the details of nuclear annihilation to the public. Although his attempt failed, Ellsberg would become famous instead for leaking what came to be known as the Pentagon Papers – the US government’s secret history of its military intervention in Vietnam.

America’s amoral military planning during the Cold War echoes the hubris exhibited by another cast of characters gambling with the fate of humanity. Recently, secret documents have been unearthed detailing what the energy industry knew about the links between their products and global warming. But, unlike the government’s nuclear plans, what the industry detailed was put into action.

In the 1980s, oil companies like Exxon and Shell carried out internal assessments of the carbon dioxide released by fossil fuels, and forecast the planetary consequences of these emissions. In 1982, for example, Exxon predicted that by about 2060, CO2 levels would reach around 560 parts per million – double the preindustrial level – and that this would push the planet’s average temperatures up by about 2°C over then-current levels (and even more compared to pre-industrial levels).

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:25 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 5:17 am
Posts: 9670
Shades of 'backo companies knowing smoking caused cancer but announcing otherwise.
Maybe someone should sue these folk for willful neglect leading to a public hazard?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:13 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21275
Location: Southeastern US
Iowanic wrote:
Shades of 'backo companies knowing smoking caused cancer but announcing otherwise.
Maybe someone should sue these folk for willful neglect leading to a public hazard?


The climate denial program followed the playbook of the tobacco industry's delaying tactics and some of the climate denial "scientists" also were supporters of the tobacco industry as well.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:32 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
Now fence sitters I want you to pay attention. This is what a carbon tax looks like.

Image


https://nypost.com/2018/12/07/in-france ... rike-back/

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:18 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 8) :lol: :lol: :lol: =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: 8) 8) 8) :angel: :angel: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: 600,000 hits.


And, another look at what a carbon tax looks like. Image

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Last edited by Milton Banana on Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:03 am 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
Well, isn't this just special.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/na ... han-losses

Quote:
Antarctic Peninsula
A new NASA study says that Antarctica is overall accumulating ice. Still, areas of the continent, like the Antarctic Peninsula photographed above, have increased their mass loss in the last decades.

A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:07 am 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 791
A little extra information for the fence sitters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j46mnIcz330

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 6:01 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21275
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Well, isn't this just special.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/na ... han-losses

Quote:
Antarctic Peninsula
A new NASA study says that Antarctica is overall accumulating ice. Still, areas of the continent, like the Antarctic Peninsula photographed above, have increased their mass loss in the last decades.

A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.


A new study from 2015? Even their estimates say the snowfall increase is being overwhelmed over time by the losses.

But it might only take a few decades for Antarctica’s growth to reverse, according to Zwally. “If the losses of the Antarctic Peninsula and parts of West Antarctica continue to increase at the same rate they’ve been increasing for the last two decades, the losses will catch up with the long-term gain in East Antarctica in 20 or 30 years -- I don’t think there will be enough snowfall increase to offset these losses.”

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1321 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 85, 86, 87, 88, 89  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group