Denver to Punish People over Excess CO2

[White_Male_Canada]

Now, how did we know this was coming:

By Stuart Steers, Rocky Mountain News
June 11, 2007
Denver is gearing up to fight global warming, and residents may soon be asked to make personal sacrifices to help save the planet.
The new plan is aimed at making Denver a national leader in reducing gas emissions that have been linked to global warming, giving a major push to alternative energy, stepping up recycling and changing building codes to encourage energy conservation.

But the proposal also contains some ideas that may be unpopular, such as penalizing heavy users of electricity and natural gas and basing auto insurance premiums on the number of miles traveled.

Denver may ask voters to approve higher rates for "excessive" use of electricity and natural gas. The plan also floats the idea of using insurance premiums to penalize people who drive long distances.

"You can think of them as penalties or you can think of them as market signals," said Conover. "There's some choice involved."
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5580343,00.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

:lol: LOL Yeah , do as we say our we`ll punish you. That`s your choice. :lol:

[White_Male_Canada]

Denver Sees Coldest June Morning In Over 50 Years
Pueblo Also Sets New Record Low

DENVER -- Did you have frost on your windows this morning? It felt more like March or early April along the Front Range.

The temperature at Denver International Airport fell to 31 degrees at 5:44 a.m. Friday, setting a new record low for the date.

This shattered the old record of 37 degrees, last set in 1974.

The new record low will also become the latest freeze on record for the city of Denver. The previous date of latest freeze ever recorded was June 2, 1951.

Temperatures have only dropped below freezing two other times during the month of June; in 1919 and 1951.

The coldest June temperature ever recorded was 30 degrees on June 2, 1951.

Every time there is a new weather record set for the city of Denver, the debate about where the official weather station is located arises.

It is a known fact that in most cases, temperatures are cooler at DIA than in downtown Denver.

However, weather records are only 100 to 150 years old in most cases, and there are't any other sources of data prior to the mid-1800s to use as a comparison.

So when a weather station in a city moves, regardless of where, it is still considered one continuous climate record.

The Denver station has moved from 17th and Arapahoe to Stapleton to DIA over the course of the past 100 years.

A new record low was also set in Pueblo on Friday morning. The temperature dipped to 37 degrees, breaking the old record low of 41 degrees, last set in 1890.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/weather/13467296/detail.html?rss=den&psp=news

[trish]

You may recall all flights were stopped at Denver airport during those exceptional winter lows. So what’s your point Weak-Minded-Clod. You still think global warming means every place, every where is going to get warmer and warmer. :roll: Either you’re ill informed, mislead by a simple phrase, or (more likely) hoping to misrepresent the understanding and hard won science of the overwhelming majority of the world’s climatologists.

[insert_namehere]

I live on Cundundrum Creek in Pitkin County... A ways west of Denver in the Rockies. While the Front Range has been known to do some.. er... "interesting" things, in this instance, we're already penalized for our difficulty meeting air quality standards set by the Federal Government, so it's natural that the metro area has to look for more initiatives in order to keep ozone down to a dull roar.

Rocky Mtn News, Dec 18, 2006:
"In fact, the metro area is so close to violating Environmental Protection Agency standards for ozone pollution, many believe the region will fall formally into the federal agency's dirty-air category this summer anyway. Such a fate would give the EPA a bigger role in deciding how the Denver area brings down air pollution as well as give the area's image a black eye."

As a kid growing up in Denver, I can tell you that some days, especially when we had a temperature inversion, not only was the smog unbelievable, it friggin STUNK to high heaven.

Due to the high altitude, relative lack of dispersal winds and a few other factors, the Front Range, from Castle Rock all the way up to Greeley had a mobile smog cloud that just drifted up and down the foothill basin and the Hogback.

Denver was one of the first areas in the nation to initiate a vehicle emissions inspection program. Over the years, there have been a number of times where we failed to meet EPA air quality standards and saw significant cuts in federal funds for highway maintenance and expansion programs, since there was some odd penalization tied to the two.

While Denverites will probably vote down some of the more draconian measures suggested in the article, most folks are well aware of the Quality of Life standard that the current situation jeopardizes.

And Trish - Flights were stopped at DIA due to the largest snow dump the city had experienced in a dozen years. DIA, the surrounding roads and the metro area were ill-equipped to deal with it. We've had colder winters than this one... trust me.

[White_Male_Canada]

You may recall all flights were stopped at Denver airport during those exceptional winter lows. So what’s your point Weak-Minded-Clod. You still think global warming means every place, every where is going to get warmer and warmer. :roll: Either you’re ill informed, mislead by a simple phrase, or (more likely) hoping to misrepresent the understanding and hard won science of the overwhelming majority of the world’s climatologists.

Global warming means global cooling too, how Stalinistic. Like the five year NEP`s, never worng, always on target. Anyone who questions it`s failures and internal contradictions had their motives questioned, branded Kulaks and tossed into the Gulags.

We`re not wrong, the cooling is caused by the man-made warming. There it is, the new appellation, the AGW/NEP neo-religionists. 8)

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/bou/include/showProduct.php?product=annxtrm05.txt

[trish]

Global warming means global cooling too look it up asshole.

[guyone]

It's not very nice to call people that.

[White_Male_Canada]

Global warming means global cooling too look it up asshole.

And global cooling means global warming too, all due to anthropomorphic CO2. See cooling means warming means cooling means warming all because of free enterprise and man.

The perfect Stalinist NEP argument. Our plan is perfect, it`s those damn wreckers, those kulaks. Why do they dare ask questions, who put them up to it.

Oh, ya`ll fucked up again: :lol:



http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=21481

[trish]

Like you’re totally unaware that one of predictions of global warming is a deflection of Atlantic oceans currents that will COOL Europe! You persist in criticizing your own misrepresentation of the theory of global climate change and consequently your criticisms always miss their mark.


...all due to anthropomorphic CO2. See cooling means warming means cooling means warming all because of free enterprise and man.

The perfect Stalinist NEP argument. Our plan is perfect, it`s those damn wreckers, those kulaks. Why do they dare ask questions, who put them up to it.


Once again we see you're true motivation is not the pursuit of science, but to obstruct science that you wrongly see as a threat to your beloved free enterprise. I am not a Stalinist and neither is the majority of those scientists holding forth on the view that the current climate change is primary driven by anthropogenic causes. It's YOU and your cohorts are are driven by political motivations.

[White_Male_Canada]

See cooling means warming means cooling means warming all because of free enterprise and man.

The perfect Stalinist NEP argument. Our plan is perfect, it`s those damn wreckers, those kulaks. Why do they dare ask questions, who put them up to it.


Like you’re totally unaware that one of predictions of global warming is a deflection of Atlantic oceans currents that will COOL Europe! You persist in criticizing your own misrepresentation of the theory of global climate change and consequently your criticisms always miss their mark.

Pfft~ This is too easy. You`re regurgitating more of algore`s lies. You`re refering to crazy al`s description of the Younger Dryas Event and that it will happen again in Greenland due to man-made CO2. This would require all of Greenland to melt at once, form a large lake then immediately burst into the ocean. That`s impossible simply because of THE FACTS !

- The ocean water is warmer.

- Ocean water evaporates and precipitates on the center of Greenland as observed by NASA.

-120,000 years ago the Earth was warmer but ice cores from Greenland date much further back than that.


Crazy Trish, the AGW/NEP Stalinist. 8)

[trish]

You`re refering to crazy al`s description of the Younger Dryas Event

No I’m not, you presumptuous dumb-ass. I never read Al Gore nor seen his movie. I'm referring to the actual Younger Dryas, which may be triggered by disruption of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation. Since you obviously know of it, then you know that current models of climate change DO NOT predict every place everywhere is going to get warmer monotonically in time. Yet you still persist in depicting the theory that way. Moreover, when this defect in your criticism is brought to your attention, you insist scientists have got their own theory wrong. You correct it as YOU see fit, and then criticize YOUR OWN correction! What kind of dumb-ass logic is that?



The perfect Stalinist NEP argument. I see your cowardice is still showing. Your fear of regulation is twisting your logic into a dyslexic knot of non-sequiturs and crazed declarations of having won the argument. If you have to announce it, you haven't won jack shit.

[insert_namehere]

WMC, even just watching the friggin WEATHER channel ought to have taught you a basic lesson in meteorology - water temperatures in the ocean drive air masses, warm and cold - thus creating this nutty thing called weather.

Sometimes is warm weather, sometimes it's cold. Additionally, oceans have these things called currents - channels of warm water coursing through colder bodies of water. These currents affect the temperature of the air and air masses above them. If the current is shifted (say, but the introduction of colder water from melting glaciers) the weather patterns shift, resulting, for example, in the radically altered weather patterns England has been experiencing in the past few years.

I don't mean to talk to you like a 3rd grade science teacher, but you suddenly seem to have lost any ability to think like an adult.

[White_Male_Canada]

You`re refering to crazy al`s description of the Younger Dryas Event



No I’m not, you presumptuous dumb-ass. I never read Al Gore nor seen his movie. I'm referring to the actual Younger Dryas, which may be triggered by disruption of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation.

That`s great but the THC shutdown of the YD event was theorized to be triggered by a catastrophic discharge of freshwater from Lake Agassiz.

At least your consistant in believing CO2 drives temperature change when in fact it`s the opposite and THC triggers ice melts and lake discharges.

You and algore, two peas in a pod. 8)

[White_Male_Canada]

These currents affect the temperature of the air and air masses above them. If the current is shifted (say, but the introduction of colder water from melting glaciers) the weather patterns shift, resulting, for example, in the radically altered weather patterns England has been experiencing in the past few years.

I don't mean to talk to you like a 3rd grade science teacher, but you suddenly seem to have lost any ability to think like an adult.

Sure, maybe. But then wouldn`t all the ice would have to melt all at once for a chance of what you descibe to happen.

The radical heat pattern you speak of in central europe has been explained as localized and not a result of a shift in the north atlantic oscillation.

[trish]

the THC shutdown of the YD event was theorized to be triggered by a catastrophic discharge of freshwater from Lake Agassiz.
Oh, now that it’s convenient for you, I see you’ve come around. Uniformly increasing temperatures everywhere is NOT a logical consequence of global warming; you admit that sufficient warming could divert sea currents and create areas with cooler summers then they had before the warming. You just disagree that the warming has or will become sufficient to cool Europe. So after all, even you have come over to the Stalinist non-sense that warming means cooling and cooling means warming. My what a flip-flopper you can be. Flip-flop, flip-flop….

[White_Male_Canada]

the THC shutdown of the YD event was theorized to be triggered by a catastrophic discharge of freshwater from Lake Agassiz.



Oh, now that it’s convenient for you, I see you’ve come around. Uniformly increasing temperatures everywhere is NOT a logical consequence of global warming; you admit that sufficient warming could divert sea currents and create areas with cooler summers then they had before the warming.


Oh sure, and the THC shutdown by the Lake breach was all caused by anthropogenic emissions. Yup, man-made CO2 did all that and will do it all again. This time in Greenland because the Goracle said so.

The debate is not about climate and it`s constant change, it is the fear mongers who argue the major cause is anthropogenic. On that issue you have failed miserably.

You`re insufferable, and excruciatingly obtuse.

[trish]

again, you miss the point your thickness. address the contradiction in which you find yourself.

[White_Male_Canada]

address the contradiction in which you find yourself.

You`ve come undone. I`ve dispatched your AGW theory as sheer nonsense so now the shift from AGW to natural climate shifts. If you can prove the THC shutdown of the YD event was caused by man-made CO2 and that man-made CO2 will, with 95% certainty cause another shift, you may have an argument. Until then you`re just full of hot air yourself.

[trish]

avoiding the contradiction you're in...address it.

[White_Male_Canada]

avoiding the contradiction you're in...address it.

There is none dufus.

Until you figure out whether you`re speaking of anthropogenic global warming or natural change that can, has, and will cause THC shifts you`ll forever be confused.

[trish]

Hey ASSHOLE…how’d you guess that meant you WMC?
1. You insist that if the globe warms it’s got to warm all over, everywhere, uniformly in time.
2. You claim the globe is warming because of a great swell in the solar energy flux.
3. But you also claim that in some places glaciers are growing.

So what’s up with that? Are you stuck in a contradiction. Is that why you keep ignoring the question? Warm is cool and cool is warm. And when you worm you slimy way out of that one tell me why SOHO can’t confirm you marvelous theory of increased solar flux.

“Leftists are usually correct only 50% of the time” Gee, I can’t find this proposition in any of my texts on climatology. Perhaps you can tell us how it applies to the calculation of the thermal expansion of a volume of sea water.