Tag: climate

Energy Smart Tom speaks directly … must read comments

Representative Tom Perriello (D-VA-5) was one of the first candidates to make the Energy Smart list.  Yesterday, not for the first time, he provided a clear statement as to why he merited and continues to merit a prominent position in the ‘must support’ list for anyone concerned about fostering a prosperous and secure America future.  

Interviewed by David Roberts, Grist, Perriello spoke strongly about the imperative for better energy policy, including the necessity of putting a price on carbon.  While too many in the Commonwealth are flaunting their anti-science syndrome credentials, Perriello is speaking forthrightly and directly. His narrow victory in 2008 has him in the Republican cross hairs for defeat this November but Perriello doesn’t speak directly — he speaks with great integrity and from principle.   That characteristic, of having the courage of convictions and being able to speak coherently about them, goes a long way with voters who might disagree in a specific case but who respect a clear-speaking politician with principles.  

And, Tom’s words about the Senate-House relationship — his direct and strong words — merit attention, echoing, and applause.

Carpe Diem!

The Obama Administration seems to be pulling back, on front after front, in the face of economic challenges, sobering poll numbers, and steadfast Republican obstinacy.

Whether on health care, jobs promoting legislation, EPA regulation of pollutants, and/or energy/climate policy, the political powers that be within the Obama White House have determined that ‘tactical retreats’ toward even more incremental policy concepts is the path forward in an illusive search for bipartisanship policy making with an elusive (and recalcitrant) Republican minority.  Watering down already weakened (and inadequate) policy constructs and approaches is path toward increased problems, rather than solutions, on political, economic, and climate terms.  

Rather than retreat toward ever weaker policy concepts, President Obama would well serve the nation through a step back to consider the totality of the environment with then a strong and aggressive step forward with stronger proposals to seize the huge opportunities that lie before use with real solutions to our jobs, economic, health care, energy, and climate challenges.

Weather vs Climate — There is a Difference

For our scientifically challenged fellow-citizens, it may hard to understand, but simply experiencing a few record-setting Snow Storms, does NOT automatically disprove the theory of Global Warming (aka Climate Change).  Science doesn’t work that way.  Science takes evidence.  Science takes data.  Science takes experiments – and lots and lots of Measuring. … It takes measuring of those boring things, called Facts.

The theory of Climate Change, views weather events from a long-term perspective.   Climate varies from year to year. Decade to decade.

Climate is a generational phenomenon. (could be why the younger generation “gets it” — more so than the older.)

Weather, on the other hand, changes with the wind.  Weather is a daily event.  Weather is the background noise, upon which we plan our daily lives.

In other words, weather can change – a lot;  over the course of a week, or over a Season. … Weather can even swing wildly over the course of a day sometimes – just ask anyone caught without rain gear, when unexpected downburst rolls in.

Weather is volatile.  Weather is constantly changing.  Climate not so much.

Climate summit recognises US deal

Delegates at the Copenhagen summit have passed a motion recognising a US-backed agreement on climate change.

But correspondents say it is not yet clear whether the motion is unanimous or what its legal implications are.

Delegates at the climate summit had been battling to prevent the talks ending without reaching a final deal.

Earlier, a US-led group of five nations – including China – tabled a last-minute proposal that President Barack Obama called a “meaningful agreement”.

However, it had been rejected by a few developing nations which felt it failed to deliver the actions needed to halt dangerous climate change.

The majority of nations had been urging the Danish hosts to adopt the deal.

“The conference decides to take note of the Copenhagen Accord of December 18, 2009,” the chairman of the plenary session of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) declared on Saturday morning, swiftly banging down his gavel.

To be accepted as an official UN agreement, the deal needs to be endorsed by all 193 nations at the talks.

This agreement isn’t a move towards achieving a reduction in CO2 out put or other forms of pollution which have contributed to global warming. Its just another way of avoiding any real changes in the behavior of the worlds nations or its people. After all with no verification there was no reason to even call this an agreement.    

120% of public think climate scientists lie about global warming says Fox FAIL and Balanced News

 Crossposted at Daily Kos

    I thought mistakes at Fox would have consequences?

    Guess not.

    Last week, Fox and Friends showed a Rasmussen poll graphic revealing that a whopping 120 percent of the American public believes scientists may be falsifying research to support their own theories on global warming:


    Fox News’ graphics department added together the “very likely” and “somewhat likely” numbers to reach 59 percent, and called that new group “somewhat likely.” Then, for some reason, they threw in the 35 percent “very likely” as their own group, even though they already added that number to the “somewhat likely” percentage. Then they mashed together the “not very likely” and “not likely at all” groups, and threw the 15 percent who were unsure into the waste bin. Voila – 120 percent.

Hat tip to MediaMatters.org

Some Bold text added by the diarist.

    More fun with inventing numbers below the fold . . .  

4 Inches Deeper

The 1976 Viking lander would have likely found water ice on Mars if it had probed just 4 inches deeper.

NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter has revealed frozen water hiding just below the surface of mid-latitude Mars. The spacecraft’s observations were obtained from orbit after meteorites excavated fresh craters on the Red Planet.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
By FishOutofWater

Water ice, never seen before in Mars’ “temperate” zone, was discovered in a shallow crater that was made in 2008. The ice reveals that Mars was warmer and wetter in the relatively recent past.

The finds indicate water-ice occurs beneath Mars’ surface halfway between the north pole and the equator, a lower latitude than expected in the Martian climate.

This ice is a relic of a more humid climate from perhaps just several thousand years ago.

said Shane Byrne of the University of Arizona, Tucson.

Mars has large variations in its tilt that cause its climate to change even more strongly that the changes from glacial to interglacial on earth. However, Mars lost most of its atmosphere to space because Mars lacks the mass (size) to hold on to its upper atmosphere when it interacts with energetic particles in the solar wind. With only 1% of the atmospheric pressure of the earth, the Martian surface is uninhabitable to humans.

Mysterious Glow-in-the-Dark Arctic Clouds Invade USA

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Photo By VinceVarnas, Oregon FishOutofWater

Electric blue clouds, literally at the edge of space, have been recently seen glowing in the dark from Oregon to Colorado to Virginia, further south than they have ever been seen. Noctilucent clouds were first reported in the far north after the Krakatoa eruption. Until the last several decades they were always seen north of 50 N Latitude. No one is sure why the clouds are moving south but global warming is a suspected cause.

In orange

Can I be “16 times louder”?

Last night, the House Energy and Commerce Committee voted the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Act out for consideration by the rest of the House.

This bill is filled with good … and bad elements. It has strong provisions for improving energy efficiency in the United States, a weak renewable energy standard, and massive (MASSIVE) direct and indirect subsidies and payoffs for the fossil fuel industries.

This is a challenging moment.

There are environmental organizations cheering from the rooftops. There are environmental organizations declaring their opposition. And, there are those vowing to fight even harder.

Load more