When religion blends with fanaticism and politics, it is a very dangerous tool. I was quite encouraged by W at the beginning of his first presidency: You know how he stressed the importance of compassionate conservatism... I had really believed him...

But then, the brilliant wrap around his conservatism crumbled and real W let torture be a state policy towards foreign "war prisoners."

Then I came to the conclusion that religion is a deadly tool in the hands of abuser statemen.

Republicans had to move towards the center because if they did not, they could have been marginalized and lost the political arena to the more centric and leftist agents.

But I don't believe in thier authenticity and sincerity. W lied twice and who can assure that McCain won't for the third time.

It's not anything to write home about. The only way to solve the problem is to actually cut the greenhouse gases we're putting into the air, not increase it less quickly.

I can't remember where I saw this, but somebody had a good article on this very subject, and she drew an analogy with someone who had a weight problem. He goes to his doctor one day and he weighs 225 pounds. He goes back six months later and he weighs 250 pounds; that's an 11% increase. He goes back six months after that, and he weighs 275 pounds. That's only a 10% increase! We've slowed the rate of gaining weight!

But the guy's still a fattie, isn't he? And there's another little tidbit buried in that math. Note that both the first 11% increase and the second 10% increase represent the same actual amount of weight: 25 pounds in each case. Add a certain amount to a big number and it represents a smaller percent increase than adding the same amount to a smaller number. Which is one reason why using "percent of increase" in greenhouse gases is inherently deceptive.

And I would also say that this explains why the U.S. emissions have increased less, measured in this deceptive way, than other countries'. We were emitting much more to start with, and therefore the increase we had represents a smaller percentage of this larger whole than that of another country that started with less.

It is simply inconceivable that the U.S. be doing better in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, either as a total or as a function of size of economy, than, say, France, when the U.S. has very poor public transportation and most people drive everywhere they go, and we get a lot of our electricity from coal plants, while France has excellent public transportation and people tend to drive less, and most of their electricity comes from nuclear (which for all its faults doesn't contribute to global warming at all). But it is conceivable that we're doing better in terms of "rate of increase" -- and that is yet another illustration of why this measure is deceptive.

The problem with any nation's "rate of increase" in greenhouse emissions isn't that it is bigger or smaller than another's, but that it is positive instead of negative. We need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions sharply -- not merely slow down the speed with which we're increasing them.

Here's one reference from 2002:

Bush Disses Global Warming Report, Dismisses His Own Environmental Protection Agency's Findings - CBS News

So yes, this statement by Paul Volker does a 180 on the president's previous position, in that it acknowledges the reality of anthropogenic global warming. It still amounts to stalling, though.

Good for McCain for actually recognizing the issue and making it part of his campaign.

Bad because a cap & trade system is just a way of pretending to do something while emissions continue to increase. It essentially just creates another commodity that some folk can profit off of, it will have zero effect on the problem though.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

None of it stands up to any scrutiny though.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

When someone in the world comes up with a plan to cut the rate without crippling their economy any more or other possible ramifications, then I will listen to it. No one is cutting any emissions anywhere. We just happen to be doing a better job of moving in that direction than the others.

When a plan is proposed that will do just that while taking into consideration an analysis of any other ramifications, I will listen to it. In the mean time, the US fattie is doing a better job at it. Calling the numbers dishonest does not make them dishonest.

Believe it or not, this administration is not completely bad. There are some positives for those willing to see them.

Thanks for the link. It's dated 2002, as is the official announcement of policy. Volker spoke in 2007. Does that mean someone is necessarily lying? No. It would be scarier if one's views were so dug in that they refuse to learn something new in an ever-moving area of the sciences. That may be a better explanation than the necessary lie.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them, speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

Exactly why conservatives didnt want McCain as president. He seems to have some sort of need to grab attention by being the bipartisan issue, even when the issue is wrong, like campaign finance, immigration and now GW.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

And yet you ignore all the compassionate conservatism that Bush has done, from aid to Africa for AIDs, to prescription drugs for seniors. Furthermore Bush has not made torture a state policy. You simply disagree on what is considered torture. And killing our enemies is not inconsistent with compassion. So, where did Bush lie? Show me what he said and prove that he knew it to be untrue when he said it.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

It's been proposed. Massive improvements in efficiency, and a switch from fossil fuels to either renewable energy or nuclear for electricity production, would help rather than hurting the economy (although it would require some up-front capital investment) and would cut greenhouse emissions. Ultimately, a switch to a solar-powered, hydrogen-mediated energy economy with high efficiency would reduce net greenhouse emissions to almost nil, without hurting the economy at all (indeed, it would help it).

I explained why they were dishonest, and why they do not indicate that the U.S. is doing a better job. Do you have an answer to that argument?

Well, indeed I'm making an assumption here that Bush was not displaying intellectual integrity in his original position, that we don't know what he actually thinks about the science involved, and that everything he's done has been done to protect the fossil-fuel industry which is a major part of his constituency. That the fossil-fuel industry IS a major part of his constituency requires no assumption; that's obvious; and it is I think a reasonable assumption that when something he does serves to protect or enhance the profits of that industry, that is why he does it. Without being able to read his mind, and absent any tangible hard evidence like internal White House memoranda leaks, it's not possible to prove that, but the assumption follows naturally from the observation that he's a politician.

A serious response to global warming need not hurt the economy, but it certainly will hurt the profits of the fossil-fuel industry. Thus, a politician serving the interests of that industry must delay that response as long as possible. Stating that there was not enough scientific evidence to justify such action, as Bush did in 2002, is one way to do that. When it is no longer possible to make that claim, the song and dance performed in 2007 provides another way.

Not really. You are just increasingly sending you manufacturing and resource production to other countries (like Canadian oil sands, for example). And if you include the amount of emissions coming from your military you are not moving in any positive direction at all. Quite the opposite.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

[Emphasis mine] I'll need to see a link to support your claim. I don't think you and I will ever agree that the end of civilization is the answer, BTW.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them, speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

This is your explanation why they are dishonest numbers?

It may be inconceivable to you, but until you show me something to support your disbelief, I have nothing to go on. (BTW, the numbers were indexed with economy size, as well.)

Yes, the gains in energy innovation industry in the US have been impressive. Those gains were helped, in part, by the policy incentives.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them, speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

No, this is:

Yes, I would probably agree with most of this - although it is frustrating that McCain doesn't know the language of the business community. There is a lot that he could do to bring in fiscal conservatives who are understandably concerned about the sky-high cost of all of this. Hopefully he will start to learn: he is infinitely pereferable to Obama on this.

I would certainly agree that he has to address this issue. It is unavoidable. And yes - there is indeed a strong Green Christian movement. I know many people involved with it.

__________________
"Our fears in Banquo
Stick deep; in his royalty of nature
Reigns that which would be fear'd: 'tis much he dares;
And, to that dauntless temper of his mind,
He hath a wisdom that doth guide his valour
To act in safety."

Macbeth 3:1

- Because the definition of energy consumption by the IPCC excludes international bunker fuels from the statistics of all countries, emissions from international bunker fuels are subtracted from the U.S. total. Similarly, because the IPCC excludes emissions from military bunker fuels from national totals, they are subtracted from the U.S. total.



EIA - Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the U.S. 2006-Carbon Dioxide Emissions

Of course not. I'm way out of the mainstream on that. But to clarify, i don't necessarily view it as the answer to the problem - its more of a case that if we don't answer the problem, the end of civilization will be the inevitable result (even ignoring climate change and ecosystem destruction, we still need an answer for the fact that our energy economy is not sustainable).

I don't think we will be emitting much of anything when/if the global economy collapses.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

Thanks for the link.

From the Department of State:
Now, I look at your claim that we don't count military emissions and your data supporting it (thanks again). Not only did the military actually cut emmissions, when we add them in over that same time period, they will only make our decrease in positive rate of increase even better than others.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them, speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition