Mad Mike

certainly, and the plants making the plastic for the bottles and NASA as well.

BULL****. 

Here's what we can thank fracking for:

Fracking is not the cause of quakes. The real problem is wastewater. - The Washington Post

 

For instance, in Oklahoma, state records show that companies injected more than 1.1 billion barrels of wastewater into the ground in 2013, the most recent year for which data is available. The following year, Oklahoma had more magnitude-3 earthquakes than California did. The quakes clustered around wastewater injection wells.

Oklahoma’s current earthquake rate is now 600 times higher than its pre-fracking rate, which was based on the state’s natural seismicity, the state geological survey said

Fracking Wells Tainting Drinking Water in Texas and Pennsylvania, Study Finds

 

The researchers found eight clusters of contaminated drinking water wells—seven in Pennsylvania and one in Texas—where integrity problems at nearby fracking wells were the source of the problem.

The main hazard of methane in drinking water systems is the chance of explosion: The gas readily separates from the water if exposed to air, and can escape through faucets and gaps in household piping. Because methane is odorless, a homeowner may not notice his or her basement or shed filling up with the gas. One spark or strike of a match, and boom goes the room.

There is currently no state or federal drinking water standard for methane, and drinking methane-laden water is not viewed as a health hazard. (That said, there has been little research done on the subject. In a 2011 paper, Duke University scientists wrote they “found essentially no peer-reviewed research on its health effects at lower concentrations in water or air.”) But if methane is migrating into their water supply, experts worry other fracking-related chemicals could be migrating too.

Fracking chemicals found in Pennsylvania drinking water | Marketplace.org

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/scientists-earth-endangered-by-new-strain-of-fact-resistant-humans

“These humans appear to have all the faculties necessary to receive and process information,” Davis Logsdon, one of the scientists who contributed to the study, said. “And yet, somehow, they have developed defenses that, for all intents and purposes, have rendered those faculties totally inactive.”

 

insanity in practice    1.6 B loss to get?

 

http://m.lmtonline.com/front-news/article_de6b85bb-6683-5a44-a8c6-28ca34f9ef40.html?mode=jqm

 

The production of oil and natural gas in the Eagle Ford Shale generated more than $87 billion in total economic output for the state last year, including $5 billion in Webb County, according to a study released Tuesday by the University of Texas at San Antonio Institute for Economic Development.

 

UTSA researchers also concluded that shale activity supported almost 155,000 full-time equivalent jobs and provided more than $4.4 billion to local and state governments in 2013.

In Webb County, the shale activity supported 9,870 full-time jobs, the study states.

Four-Star Warning: Generals Dub Climate Change a Security Risk - NBC News.com

 

“Political posturing and budgetary woes cannot be allowed to inhibit discussion and debate over what so many believe to be a salient national security concern for our nation,” the generals and admirals wrote. “… Time and tide wait for no one.”

Key findings include:

• “…climate change impacts are already accelerating instability in vulnerable regions," including the Arctic.
• “Projected climate change impacts within the United States will place key elements of our National Power at risk and threaten our homeland security.”
• “The projected impacts of climate change will threaten major sectors of the U.S. economy.”

Buncha commies I tell ya.

Why?

 

Incentive is not bribery .

 

Why don't ya just order them to invest billions   .....socialists/environmentalists playing footsies. 

No one is suggesting ordering corporations to move anywhere. That's just straw man bull****.

A trained, healthy workforce, sound infrastructure and local economy and good quality of life ARE incentives. Giving millions of dollars in tax breaks to corporations who already make BILLIONS in profit is insane. 

Or... Here's an idea.... No one gives subsidies, and local governments attract corporations with educated/ trained workers, sound infrastructure, and quality of life.

Since when is bribery the preferred way to do business?

Tracking Political Contributions from Oil and Coal | BillMoyers.com

Members of Congress | Dirty Energy Money - Oil Change International

Ted Cruz | Dirty Energy Money - Oil Change International

US taxpayers subsidising world's biggest fossil fuel companies | Environment | The Guardian

 

 

• A proposed Shell petrochemical refinery in Pennsylvania is in line for $1.6bn (£1bn) in state subsidy, according to a deal struck in 2012 when the company made an annual profit of $26.8bn.
• ExxonMobil’s upgrades to its Baton Rouge refinery in Louisiana are benefitting from $119m of state subsidy, with the support starting in 2011, when the company made a $41bn profit.
• A jobs subsidy scheme worth $78m to Marathon Petroleum in Ohio began in 2011, when the company made $2.4bn in profit.

Oil & Gas | OpenSecrets

 

An already politically active industry ramped up its presence in campaign finance even further in 2012 as presidential candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney debated climate change and potential curbs on carbon emissions. Companies with interests in oil and gas contributed more than $70 million to federal candidates in the 2012 cycle, more than double the total from 2010.

Political donations from the industry - which includes gas producers and refiners, natural gas pipeline companies, gasoline stations, and fuel oil dealers - have taken on an increasingly conservative tint over the past two decades. In the 2012 cycle, 90 percent of its contributions went to the GOP.

Republicans rake in cash from oil-and-gas industry | TheHill

 

ExxonMobil topped the list at $344,500 in contributions, $304,500 of which went to Republicans.

Koch Industries, owned by the billionaire brothers who have often backed conservative candidates and causes, came in second by giving $297,000 to Republicans and $5,000 to Democrats.

Rounding out the top five were Marathon Petroleum ($226,000), Halliburton ($161,500) and Chevron ($153,501).

How Exxon Mobil Finances The Republican Party | ThinkProgress

this is what you call a debate?

You are correct. A debate would require some form of credible counter argument to mine. You have not provided one.

1). You're making a post like this, and accusing somebody else of childish debating?

2). Me, I was admiring you pointing out that the entire GOP has been bought, and him responding that you can only buy what's for sale.

Not for the first time will I say I really don't care what you think Larry.

Friends with Benefactors - The Daily Show - Video Clip | Comedy Central

"The question remains, to whom does Cruz owe favors because of the oil money" 

Sen. Ted Cruz: Campaign Finance/Money - Summary - Senator 2014 | OpenSecrets

ever seen Clintons oil connections?

ya can only buy what is for sale.

*BAM!* I think about 50 brain cells died that time.

The above comment is not relative in any way shape or form to this debate. As a form of argument it is only admissible to third grade school yards. I hereby deduct points from your score, and may God have mercy on your silly little soul.

or ya would rather see 300 million elsewhere and NASA keep looking at the sky instead of being distracted

 

insanity

Instead of being distracted... BY THE FACT THAT BIG OIL HAS PURCHASED THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Insanity indeed. And that child in your sig will pay the price.

The G.O.P.’s War on Science Gets Worse - The New Yorker

 

Last week, the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, headed by Texas Republican Lamar Smith, approved a bill that would slash at least three hundred million dollars from NASA’s earth-science budget. “Earth science, of course, includes climate science,” Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Texas Democrat who is also on the committee, noted. (Smith said that the White House’s NASA budget request favored the earth sciences “at the expense of the other science divisions and human and robotic space exploration.”) Johnson tried to get the cuts eliminated from the bill, but her proposed amendment was rejected. Defunding NASA’s earth-science program takes willed ignorance one giant leap further. It means that not only will climate studies be ignored; some potentially useful data won’t even be collected.

 

The vote brought howls of protest from NASA itself and from wider earth-science circles. The agency’s administrator, Charles Bolden, issued a statementsaying that the bill “guts our Earth science program and threatens to set back generations worth of progress in better understanding our changing climate.” In an opinion piece for the Washington Post, Marshall Shepherd, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Georgia and the former president of the American Meteorological Association, said that he could not sleep after hearing about the vote. “None of us has a ‘vacation planet’ we can go to for the weekend, so I argue that NASA’s mission to study planet Earth should be a ‘no-brainer,’ ” he wrote.

This is stupidity on a criminal scale. It's like choosing to text rather than keep your eyes on the road while driving. Worse, It is enforced ignorance and a willful attempt to suppress the truth.

There are two reasons to support this budget. You are either a criminal working for big oil or a complete moron.

Gravity Data Confirms: Antarctica Is Melting Faster Than Ever Before | Popular Science

 

  In flybys over Antarctica, the satellites were able to weigh the mass of Antarctica's ice cover. GRACE measures gravity by orbiting in formation around the earth. One satellite follows the other at a set distance, but when they pass over an area of greater gravity (an area with more mass), the lead satellite gets pulled away from its companion. By comparing gravity anomalies over time, GRACE can see where water is moving around the world. The data showed that between 2003 and 2014, Antarctica lost 92 billion tons of ice per year. That's the net amount of ice loss--some ice grew back in East Antarctica, but the gains were a drop in the bucket compared to the 121 billon tons of ice that the West Antarctic ice shelf lost during that time.

"The fact that West Antarctic ice-melt is still accelerating is a big deal because it's increasing its contribution to sea-level rise," Harig said in a press release. "It really has potential to be a runaway problem. It has come to the point that if we continue losing mass in those areas, the loss can generate a self-reinforcing feedback whereby we will be losing more and more ice, ultimately raising sea levels by tens of feet."

If it was a conspiracy to "promote" the concept of global warming, why lower the temps? Why not manipulate to raise them? 

The article is moronic. 

He's not here to hunt bear.

 

(hunting bear in this context meaning honestly discussing most issues)

 

twa is mostly here to poke around and cause a ruckus.   He doesn't believe half of what he says

 

(or more often implies, he's too smart to actually say some things with certainly but just likes to throw out open ended baloney and leave certain "impressions" behind)

 

IHOP, on the other hand, reads the CanadaFreePress and actually believes it.   

I disagree. He's trying to hunt bear. He just doesn't have a big enough gun. 

Since ya seem to assert only the uneducated are AGW skeptics perhaps ya have already lost too many.

 

I'm trying to give ya the benefit of doubt by assuming you just want to indoctrinate them with your brand of education. 

And you assume that it is every major scientific organization in the world, including NASA, and backed by the US military, NOT the republican party backed by big oil and gas who kiss the rings of their masters for political donations who are doing the political indoctrination.

Poof... poof... poof... poof.... 

Oil & Gas | OpenSecrets

 

 

Political donations from the industry - which includes gas producers and refiners, natural gas pipeline companies, gasoline stations, and fuel oil dealers - have taken on an increasingly conservative tint over the past two decades. In the 2012 cycle, 90 percent of its contributions went to the GOP.

Koch brothers set $889 million budget for 2016

Republican hopefuls appear at billionaire Koch retreat | Reuters

That sounds like what the Communists do, with the proper instruction all things are possible. 

I see. Education now equals communism. 

Poof... there goes another brain cell.

He's crafty that way. Once you lose half of them, he'll have you agreeing with Ted Cruz. 

There is only one way to fight ignorance... education.

I think I can actually feel brain cells dying from reading TWAs posts.

not on the worst 

 

may be on the middle

 

which of course leaves maybe on the low

 

 

science, gotta love it....we are coming out of a ice age, of course we are warming (till we ain't)

 

 

Duke Researcher Denounces Rush Limbaugh's "Ridiculous" Distortion Of His Global Warming Study | Blog | Media Matters for America

 

The idea that there 'isn't any warming' is ridiculous. Over the past century there are countless datasets indicating warming (weather stations, sea level, ice mass, ocean temperatures, etc.).

[...]

Our study shows that we are probably not on the worst-case IPCC scenario but that we may be on an IPCC middle-of-the road scenario. The IPCC does not make predictions they make hypothetical projections. So this result does not contradict the IPCC conclusions at all.

Warmest year on record? 

 

well maybe if ya ignore nasa satellite data   or it could have been 2004 or .....

So you are saying that NASA is ignoring it's own data? That's your claim? LOL!

NASA, NOAA Find 2014 Warmest Year in Modern Record | NASA

And here's the real kicker... NASA even provides source code and documentation for their calculations. Transparency FTW.

Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: Sources

 

 

some, not soon enough

 

 

I saw a great Q&A with Quentin Tarantino. He said he wished he could have worked with Lee Van Cleef and called him one of the great bad ***** of all time.  I have to agree.

BTW... A little off topic... Well a lot actually but still related....

Several years ago when Bush was still Prez and the lunatic left was claiming that the CIA trained and armed bin Laden. I found the email address of the journalist/author people quoted when making the claim and asked him directly about it. He confirmed my understanding that the CIA never had contact with him and were in fact working with actual Afghanis. He expressed to me much the same frustration with the distorted representation of his research as the author above.

It's amazing how responsive people can be if you respectfully ask the right questions. (and of course are lucky enough to find a valid email address )

what in his statement changed the findings of his study?

Nothing. What his statement does is shoot down the bull **** interpretation of the study coming from climate change deniers.

 

 

In the long run I certainly hope that my findings will help constrain the climate's sensitivity to CO2 but they do not, on their own, relieve society of the threat of dangerous warming arising from anthropogenic emissions of CO2.

 

 

So contrary to some reports that have appeared in the media, anthropogenic climate change is not called into question by my study.