60 minutes = $188 million in new debt

OK, I got a homework assignment for Trish and Robert and anyone else who wants to take the task.

I keep hearing that I should read the facts and that most scientist agree that climate change is either real or a hazard to life on the planet.

Here's my task, make a list of all the scientists in the world, then make a list of all the scientists that agree that climate change is either real or is a danger to life. And don't leave anyone out cause if you do then I would have to believe your facts as being false.

As I said aways back in another topic about climate change.I don't care, I don't care if the world explodes tomorrow.

As far as hollywood mouth pieces for the environment, Darryl Hannah was just arrested for protesting an oil pipeline, that Deprickio guy is always on with causes, I'm sure one of them is about the environment. so, go ahead now, make that list of scientists for me, I await the facts.

The Keystone XL Pipeline is an relevant topic to discuss.

It would carry bitumen from one the largest carbon deposits in the entire world, the Tar Sands of Alberta all the way from Canada down to the coast of Texas where it will be refined and sold in overseas markets. Producing the segments, connectors, gaskets etc. and the actual construction and laying of the line would produce jobs galore. I’m guessing in the tens of thousands, in the U.S. and Canada. The $13 billion cost of the project whether they’re paid by TransCanada Corp., ConocoPhilips, or the Canadian and U.S. taxpayers will inject money into our economic systems; i.e. it’ll be a mini-stimulus. Those are the pros.

The cons are as the follows. The project promises to eventually release the fossilized carbon dioxide from one of the largest carbon deposits in the entire world. The pipeline will carry bitumen, which is acidic crude, over one of the largest aquifers in the North American continent, the Ogallala. The design of the XL doesn’t have a very good record. Similar piping has been known to spring leaks. I heard thirty miles of pipe sprung twelve leaks over a one year period. This line will be over 2000 miles long. Heineman, the republican governor of Nebraska opposes the project because it will endanger single most important source of fresh water for his state. People, crops and livestock all depend on the Ogallala aquifer.

So is the project worth the risks? I sure as hell don’t know. I can only tell you that if project is carried out it will contribute significantly to the density of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and it will accelerate the growing climatic heat imbalance. It may or may not irreparably pollute a gargantuan fresh water aquifer. I can also tell you that if the project is stopped, it won’t be producing jobs, it won’t be generating money for the stock holders of TransCanada or for ConocoPhillips, nor will it be generating energy for a developing world that requires energy at an ever growing rate.

It’s an issue on which people can have differing opinions, and even Hollywood peacocks, the last time I checked the Constitution, are allowed to have opinions, and unless the particular peacock that concerns is shitting in freshwater ponds while telling you not to pollute, I wouldn’t necessarily count it among the hypocrites. In any case, I wouldn’t be forming my opinion on the Keystone XL Pipeline based on my perception of Leonardo DiCaprio’s level of hypocrisy. I’ll stick to the relevant issues. Likewise, I’m not going base my opinion on what to do, if anything, about the ongoing CO2 forced climate shift on whether or not some climate scientists stuck in a hotel miles from the convention center were shuttled to their seven a.m. registration and meeting by a hotel “limo.”

Nor do a I think a complete list of every single climate scientist in the world showing who supports the standard climate model, who doesn’t is extremely relevant. What is relevant is the theory and evidence that so many experts have found to be convincing. So I will decline the request to tabulate such a list. I will recommend that if someone is truly interested in coming to their own decision on whether climate change is occurring due to the release of fossilized greenhouse gases, then they may benefit by first acquiring some knowledge of elementary elementary atmospheric studies. Pick an elementary text like John Houghton’s The Physics of Atmospheres. It appealed to me because of my interest in astrophysics. It’s very general and it is non-committal about the issue of global warming on Earth...mainly because it’s an elementary text that saves those more complex issues for later courses. Once you have a background, once you understand what powers the Earth’s climate, the channels of energy flow, and what systems govern climatic variations about equilibria, then you won’t have to use observations of Leonardo DiCaprio’s, Al Gore’s and Tony Hayward’s behavior as indicators of scientific truth.

Got a question for you, if the Keystone XL Pipeline was in China do you think there would be any consideration what to do?

So we should risk poisoning our fresh water aquifer on the presumption that China would risk their fresh water? Is that what a "skeptic" calls a rational basis for making a decision?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

So we should risk poisoning our fresh water aquifer on the presumption that China would risk their fresh water? Is that what a "skeptic" calls a rational basis for making a decision?

---

Regulating yourself to death while a very large population continues unregulated, makes no sense what so ever. We used to manufacture things, and millions of Americans had good paying jobs that supported healthy families. Today regulatory costs have driven 80% of the manufacturing jobs elsewhere, where regulations don't drive the majority of your manufacturing costs. Without a level playing field, all your precious regulations are only going to create a dead country. Hmmm.. current economic growth at? 0%?

Quote:

---

Regulating yourself to death while a very large population continues unregulated, makes no sense what so ever.

---

Is this a response to something I posted? Where did I suggest we should regulate ourselves to death? I think my position was that I didn't know whether the Keystone XL project was worth the risks or not.

Quote:

---

We used to manufacture things, and millions of Americans had good paying jobs that supported healthy families.

---

Indeed. That was the case during the Clinton administration. We had a ten year budgetary surplus then.

Quote:

---

Today regulatory...

---

restrictions are virtually non-existent. May I remind you that polluting our water supplies will...

Quote:

---

only ... create a dead country.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

Got a question for you, if the Keystone XL Pipeline was in China do you think there would be any consideration what to do?

---

Can anyone tell when China, formerly called Communist China in the press, became the ideal model, for setting US standards? For most of my long life I heard that Communist countries had no regard for the freedom, (and thus the well being) for the people in thier countries. Were those a pack of lies, back then? If not, then the other possibility is that many here now feel the same as the old communist leadership, that is meager existence for the general public, but lives of privilege for the ruling class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodajazz

Can anyone tell when China, formerly called Communist China in the press, became the ideal model, for setting US standards? For most of my long life I heard that Communist countries had no regard for the freedom, (and thus the well being) for the people in thier countries. Were those a pack of lies, back then? If not, then the other possibility is that many here now feel the same as the old communist leadership, that is meager existence for the general public, but lives of privilege for the ruling class.

---

Communism? That's a description of feudalism.

Ugh, not to try and impose, but China is still not the front runner in anything except for social injustices. Yea they get chocies they would never get, but htey have to basically sit through slavery to get those chances... fucing ignore that shit, same with everying. Fuck these idiots who think that clai9ming a new republic will secure everyghing... theyre proposing a weak virtue of communism, ... a situation that wont work withtr anuyone who has brains,.... sadlyI(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

Regulating yourself to death while a very large population continues unregulated, makes no sense what so ever. We used to manufacture things, and millions of Americans had good paying jobs that supported healthy families. Today regulatory costs have driven 80% of the manufacturing jobs elsewhere, where regulations don't drive the majority of your manufacturing costs. Without a level playing field, all your precious regulations are only going to create a dead country. Hmmm.. current economic growth at? 0%?

---

The deadliest disaster in New York city prior to 9/11 was a workplace fire in 1911. 146 workers, of which only 17 were men died. The youngest who died were age 14. So many died because the employer had locked exits to prevent theft. They had 6 day work weeks and worked 52 hours every week. Inronically the last 6 victims were identified, this year 2011. Lack of regulation can also mean death.
Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Image_of_Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire_on_ March_25_-_1911.jpg" class="image"><img alt="Image of Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire on March 25 - 1911.jpg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/87/Image_of_Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire_on_March _25_-_1911.jpg/287px-Image_of_Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire_on_March _25_-_1911.jpg"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/8/87/Image_of_Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire_on_March _25_-_1911.jpg/287px-Image_of_Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire_on_March _25_-_1911.jpg