News-Record.com

My step-dad is 84 years old, he was born and raised in Roaring River. He said that when he was a child, the river froze solid every winter . . . SOLID!

Whatever the reason, a change has occured.

The sun is brighter. You can almost feel your eyelids getting a sunburn.

The weather is changing. This old earth doesn't have much time left. Better hold on tight. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

Climactic changes take place over thousands of years, no one can see measurable changes occur in their lifetime.

C'mon, that is ridiculous to state that simply because we are experiencing a few cooler than normal days you can throw out the whole science of global warming. Local temps. might fluctuate naturally, but it is undeniable that the average GLOBAL temp. has increased at the fastest rate in recorded history.

I guess you would also say that if we went a day without a suicide bombing in Iraq we could say "Mission Accomplished" too right...you have to open your eyes and look at the larger picture and stop relying on "junk" science to base your arguments. Take a look at the National Climatic Data Center website if you want to have a look at the truth (or ask the inhabitants of the Maldive Islands!)

Yeah this cool weather has made me have to use heat in the last few weeks. That makes Duke Power have to burn more coal at Belews Lake and thus add more pollution to the air which contributes to global warming.

So cool weather causes global warming!!

Greg I bet if the temps in the last weeks had been in the 90's you and the global warming crowd would be out there protesting.

Nah, I would have headed to Ocrakoke!!

Global warming is a fact endorsed by most climatologists and scientists around the world. What is at debate is the effect humans have on it. Are we catalyzing it? Probably.

I agree with Brian. We can see all kinds of damage done by pollution. It isn't hard to imagine that there is damage we can't see.

What odd timing for this.

Just on this past Thursday a group of scientists announce a new finding about global warming.

It seems that we are doing such a good job cleaning up air pollution that more sunlight is reaching the earth's surface. Turns out that air pollution was preventing global warming.

That is going to get the environmental wackos pants in a wad.

Dan-

From your post it seems that you are assuming that I am some tree-hugging environmentalist. Believe me that is not the case. I just don't agree with how these radical right wing buffoons are forming these think tanks of "junk" scientists (Wise Use) to refute global warming simply so they can continue catering to their cronies in the energy sector by removing the laws challenging their profits. It is sickening how this administration is putting corporate profit above everything else, and willing to discredit science in the process.

By spewing this rhetoric - and having people believe it - they are able to put forth a weak energy policy and political agenda that not only threatens the environment, but also our national security and international standing as well.

It's not just an issue of global warming for me - it really is so much more!

"we doing such a good job cleaning up air polution that more sunlight is getting through"

Who is the wacko?: The one who said this or the one who believes this? answer:both

How about the one who probably didn't even read the article?

Greg, read Mac's post. I heard this last week as well.

My point is that we are seen by the left wing enviromentalists and their buddies in the media as the global bad guy polluters while the rest of the world has gone green. The opposite is correct. We are cleaning up our mess pretty well, doesn't mean we are perfect, but pay a visit to a few other countries.

I spent a few days in London. This is gross, but the air pollution was so bad when I blew my nose what came out was black colored. In France you would not dare touch the water in the Seine river, it is nasty. Ditto for the Thames, I saw large pieces of garbage just a floating down the murky brown water. They even had special nets to catch it.

Then try a second or third world country. I haven't been to many with the exception of South America. Pollution there is pretty bad, I could only imagine what India, Russia and some others look like.

So frankly Greg, I really don't care what our international standing on pollution is. Tell them to clean up their own back yards before telling us what to do.

As for national security, it's the liberals who won't let us explore for more domestic oil & gas and who have blocked the building of a single new refinery in this country for the last 20 years, much less a nuclear power plant. That my friend makes us more dependant upon other countries for energy, which is not too good for national security.

I'm with you Tim...I would love to see the sources on that one. That is completely laughable!!

Greg, go to

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050502/full/050502-8.html

Can anyone tell me how to make links like this live so you can just click on them and be there?

I travel quite extensively and have been to all the places that you have mentioned. As for third world countries I have been to quite a few of those as well, and to compare the US to say Thailand or Cambodia - which I have been and seen first hand - is just not fair. The US is the greatest emitter of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (25%). So to impose the same regulations to an LDC - that is struggling to get by - that you would impose on the superpower of the world is just illogical in my book. If I may ask what do you think the role of a superpower should be? In my eyes I think we have an obligation to the world that we should be setting standards for the world to live by. Not this third grade mentality that says "well they're not doing it so we don't have to." Just my opinion. I know it's crazy - a liberal with a little morality!!

But that is not even my argument though. I can somewhat understand why Bush and company bailed out of the Kyoto Treaty because of the China situation. But make up for it in some way! How did they make up for it? They left it up to the corporations to set their own emission standards! What kind of policy is that? Do you actually think that the corporations are actually going to do anything to curb their emissions and hurt their profits without being pressured from the top? Probably not. This is the point I was trying to make in my last post. This administration has turned over our energy policy to these corporations to let them freewheel it. Every single member of our energy task force has direct/indirect ties to the energy sector. That should send a red flag right there!!
You say that we are cleaning up our mess pretty good. What/how do you mean by that?? As for the Seine and Thames Rivers being dirty - have you ever been to NY and seen the Hudson? I don't think there is a river in any big city that I would want to swim in!!

And as for saying that the liberals are to blame for our national security problems because they are fighting to stop drilling in ANWR is crazy. I believe the key lies in fuel efficiency not more drilling. If we raised our fuel efficiency standards by 1-mpg that would be twice that we could extract from ANWR and if we could up that by 8-mpg we would eliminate ALL Persian Gulf imports. So "my friend" which is more logical? Drilling for limited amounts of oil (that would probably go to China by the way) in a National Wildlife Refuge or pushing for better fuel efficiency and getting off the black gold for good - and no longer funding terrorism?

Greg, did you read the article at nature.com? I checked around the website and didn't see any signs of partisan bias, most nature related websites tend to lean left. Hope you had a good laugh, as that was what you were seeking. I'm sure you will come up with a way to spin that article to your favor.

Don't have time to dissect your mantra, the kids just got home & have to get dinner ready. No problem with increasing gas mileage on my part.

I just get sick of you libs always blaming America for everything wrong in the world and then turn around and say we should be the shining example to the rest of the world. This is one of the cleanest countries I have seen. Go help the Cambodians if it's so important to you.

Yeah thats good turn to condescension when you can't make an argument...I guess that makes me a bad person because I care about others in the world that aren't as fortunate. As for dissecting my "mantra", pls feel free. I would love to see just how deep your ignorance goes.

You say I'm blaming America for all the worlds problems. No, I'm just blaming American leaders for an absurd energy policy that caters to special interests groups. Can you refute this claim? Because this is my whole problem! Like I said previously it is not so much about the global warming. Only the fact that they are challenging the validity of the science - and the entire world opinion for that matter - just to stuff the pockets of their cronies.

And no I'm not going to spin the article you posted. Do I still think it is laughable? Yep! I could produce many of articles that contradict that but you wouldn't be interested in those right?!

Dan
First I looked at the article in question. I think the verdict is still out. This research could be legit but as they are the first, to my knowledge, to raise this point then for me at least lets wait and see how the rest of the science community reacts. You,people in general not you, can read into it what they want but I didnt see anywhere that they would suggest that pollution was protecting us from global warming.

I will admit in this direction I am leaning pro-environment. There is so much beauty on this planet and as we have such great power and ability to destroy it then we have even a greater responsibility to ensure its continual survival. And if that means a company must install something to reduce pollution at the expense of some CEO's bonus then so be it.

And what we do in America should not be done based on the what the world does. We should care enough about our own environment to do it for that reason only.

We can go back and forth on what the europeans do in comparison to americans but I think with no ends. But for me Greensboro is and has always been one of the most beautiful cities I have been in.

Sorry Dan to the comment about the libs. I find it no better than the conservatives outlook that we are so perfect that any problem in the world is them and not us. I dont blame all the ills in the world on america that would be completely wrong but we are involved in many and to deny so is blind, this is not directed at you.

Sorry to hurt your feelings Greg, I don't think you are a bad person, no condescension intended, just a joke. Lighten up my friend.

If the U.S. energy policy is your whole problem as you state, please tell me what you, newly elected President Greg of the US of A would do other than changing CAFE levels. I sure would be interested in the articles you mention, thanks in advance for providing the links.

Hayes, I appreciate your comments. Let's see where the research goes, and not dismiss this study as laughable in Gregs words.

Believe it or not, I am conservative and pro environment. Yes those two can go together, last time I checked no one is for dirty air & dead fish. I don't like the mass cutting of trees by developers and would not live in a neighborhood where this takes place. I enjoy camping, hiking, and running outside with my children. I have disdain for people who litter and teach my children that this is a bad practice. I don't want industries to pollute the air needlessly and am all for technological measures to lessen pollution, but not to the extent where my power bill doubles.

I just don't subscribe to the extremist point of view that the world is coming to an end and it's all the fault of the US.

Dan
the world coming to an end well who knows these days but I do agree it cant be put all on the shoulders of americans.

At the same time Dan, when someone criticizes Bush for something they feel is wrong, it is not a personal attack on you or your beliefs. For what it is worth, I think you are a little too sensitive with regards to criticism of Bush. He is just a man who makes decisions that are wrong some of the time in the opinion of some of the people. IMO a defense of him is not necessary every time someone voices opposition to one of his decisions.

OK, I'm braced. Ready, aim, fire.

OK, maybe "laughable" wasn't the right term - I don't want to stoop down to the level of the far-right and completely discount another new scientific study. But like I have said, this is not an issue of whether global dimming/warming/lightening is actually taking place or being reversed! It is about the lies that this administration is feeding and covering up to the public to push forth their agenda! This article basically sums it up for me Dan (plenty of footnotes to research if you so desire)...
A bit Orwellian perhaps?...

Now have a look at who is funding The Heritage Foundation (right-wing think tank)...
Heritage Foundation Funding...

Do you see that as being fair policy making or looking out for special interests? Do you really think they have the public's best interest or that of the corporation's?

Look, this is not so much about bashing Bush and company as it is about getting rid of the extremism in both directions. I don't agree with the radical environmentalists as much as I don't agree with the radical anti-environmentalists. They both have biased agendas. There has to be some kind of middle ground which I'm sure the majority of this population lies. So can you honestly tell me that this administration and the Heritage Foundation - which forms their policies - are not to the far right on this one? That is my whole problem here - the extremism!

As for a better energy policy I think I made it clear in an earlier post that we should be pushing Detroit harder for better fuel efficiency standards and bringing more national awareness to conservation. And most importantly I would stop using taxpayer $$'s for subsidizing the oil, coal, logging, etc. industries and let them bring there products to the market on their own! Isn't that ironic - I would let laissez-faire capitalism rule the day...hmm!

Greg, I looked around on http://www.cat.org.au/a4a/fakes.html (how do you do the hot links?). This group seems pretty extremist, they have a list of organizations who are "anti-environmental". I agree that extremism on both sides is prevalent and does not solve anything. So we can have some points in common.

Yvonne, you know I love you dearly!! When Greg says things like "I would love to see just how deep your ignorance goes", that is a personal attack, but it doesn't bother me. I think Greg is new to our "family" and we have all learned that the personal attack thing is out of line.

Don't worry, I'm not lock step in line with Bush, for example his policies on immigration are non-existent and all politicians, republican, democrat, national, state, local, are addicted to spending our tax money.

Look at The Weather Report at the back of the B section under Heating Degree Days. As long as the Total since July 1 is less than the Normal since July 1, the weather is warmer than average over that time span - as it is as of today, 11 May. Average the past sevearl yearly totals against the yearly normal (which is the closest thing to "climate" you can find easily) to find out whether you've been having hotter or cooler than average weather. Most cities I've investigated have been above normal.

The US's oil consumption has been increasing at an average of over 3% per year. Foreign imports have been likewise steadily increasing, even under President Bush's watch. Without compounding, if it takes 5 years to bring ANWAR on-line (a conservative estimate. It'll be more like 7 plus years), that means our consumption will have increased at least 15% in the meantime.
ANWAR oil will add less than 3% per year to available oil. Without serious conservation efforts on many fronts especially motor vehicles, we're kidding ourselves if we think ANWAR's oil will even be noticable, let alone save us from foreign oil dependency.
We'd be better off stockpiling it or maintaining it as a reserve - which it is now - for the time that we have to reserve use of other domestic and imported oil for truly national security fuel so that we can supply the tanks and planes we've sent overseas to protect us from enemies we'd have fewer of if we didn't consume so much of the world's oil.
ANWAR we should save to make our plastic do-dads from.

Check out The Weather Report at the end of the daily B section. Look for Heating Degree Days. As long as the Total since July 1 is less than the Normal since July 1, which is as close to "climate" as is readily available, it is warmer than it "should" be. Get archived info and average the Totals for as many years as you can find and compare that to the Normals. Almost all the cities I have checked have been warmer than average for quite a while now.

The US's energy consumption is growing at about 3% per year. Our use of imported oil is also steadily increasing, even under President Bush's watch. If it takes ANWAR 5 years to come on liine (a conservative estimate, most experts say 7 or more years), our oil consumption will have increased over 15% (and will still be increasing) while ANWAR will add less than 5% per year for the time it lasts.

In other words, it is very short-sighted and self-defeating to rely on ANWAR without making serious efforts at conservation, especially in our use of oil to produce motor fuels where we are literally wasting millions of barrels per year on "consumer choices" while claiming that reducing oil imports is a matter of national security.

A better choice would be to maintain ANWAR as a strategic reserve for the day that all our oil will have to be used to fuel the tanks and planes we have overseas protecting us from the enemies we wouldn't have so many of if we weren't consuming so much imported oil. Otherwise, use ANWAR's oil as raw material to produce the plastic do-dads and computer bodies we'll spend time playing with when we don't have fuel to power our gas guzzlers.

Check out The Weather Report at the end of the daily B section. Look for Heating Degree Days. As long as the Total since July 1 is less than the Normal since July 1, which is as close to "climate" as is readily available, it is warmer than it "should" be. Get archived info and average the Totals for as many years as you can find and compare that to the Normals. Almost all the cities I have checked have been warmer than average for quite a while now.

The US's energy consumption is growing at about 3% per year. Our use of imported oil is also steadily increasing, even under President Bush's watch. If it takes ANWAR 5 years to come on liine (a conservative estimate, most experts say 7 or more years), our oil consumption will have increased over 15% (and will still be increasing) while ANWAR will add less than 5% per year for the time it lasts.

In other words, it is very short-sighted and self-defeating to rely on ANWAR without making serious efforts at conservation, especially in our use of oil to produce motor fuels where we are literally wasting millions of barrels per year on "consumer choices" while claiming that reducing oil imports is a matter of national security.

A better choice would be to maintain ANWAR as a strategic reserve for the day that all our oil will have to be used to fuel the tanks and planes we have overseas protecting us from the enemies we wouldn't have so many of if we weren't consuming so much imported oil. Otherwise, use ANWAR's oil as raw material to produce the plastic do-dads and computer bodies we'll spend time playing with when we don't have fuel to power our gas guzzlers.

It's not a matter of guesswork. Go to The Weather Report and look for Heating Degree Days. As long as Total since July 1 is less than Normal since July 1, which is about as close to cumulative "climate" totals as is easily available, then it's warmer than it "should" be. Keep a yearly record for each June 29th entry as published on July 1 and see what the data says about the weather here.

At the end of each season, world weather organizations accumulate weather data and produce global reports. The past few decades have seen several record high seasons and many other seasons have placed in the top rankings.

US oil consumption is growing at about 3% per year. Foreign oil imports have steadily grown as a proportion of our consumption, even under President Bush's watch. ANWAR oil will take at least 5 years to enter the market (most analysts say 7 or more). That means that our oil consumption will grow by over 15% before ANWAR adds no more than 5% to our supply for the few years it is at maximum production.

This also means that we are being shortsighted to the point of foolishness if we think that ANWAR will reduce our reliance on foreign oil without very serious conservation measures, and the most obvious place to conserve is in motor fuels.

We claim that reducing our reliance on foreign oil is a matter of national security, but the decision to adopt more fuel efficient vehicles is a matter of consumer choice. In other words, we want all the security your money can buy, but we choose to spend our money on other things right now, thank you very much.

My thought is that ANWAR should be made - should remain - a strategic reserve against the day that we need all the oil we can produce or buy to fuel the tanks and planes that will protect us from enemies that we wouldn't have so many of if we were not consuming so much oil. Otherwise, we could use ANWAR's oil to make the plastic do-dads, thingies, and computer bodies that we'll need to play with when we can't drive our gas guzzlers any more.

I think we got the message Christopher.

Dan et al. -- Unrelated but possibly helpful: How to insert hotlinks. (I can't just paste the code directly because the computer will try to read it as a hotlink.)

First, before the phrase you want to serve as the hotlink, type a "less-than" sign (shift + comma key on most keyboards), followed immediately by:

an "a"
a space
href="

Now, immediately after the quote mark, paste the URL you're linking to, and follow it immediately with a close-quote and a "greater-than" sign (shift + period key on most keyboards).

After the end of the phrase you wish to serve as a hotlink, type a less-than sign, a forward slash, the letter "a" and a greater-than slash.

To see some examples, right click on this page and select "view page source". That will show you the code on the page. Do a "find" command for an odd word in a post that has a hotlink in it, then find that hotlink in the nearby code.

Hope this helps.