Saturday, December 01, 2007

Bad news for Lizzy May and company - Bumped with update

(Update at end)

Environment Canada forecasts "coldest winter in almost 15 years".

If November is any indication, I'm inclined to agree.


Oops. Stephane must have read the same report! Y2Kyoto: Politics ends at the swim up bar.

"We are speaking about the worst ecological threat that humanity is facing, and I will do my best to get out of this damn frozen country."

* * * *


Saturday Update: Speaking of Bali, this is a must-watch video - Rex Murphy (Bali Logic). H/T Socialist Gulag:

...If global warming is the imminent and catastrophic peril to the earth that everyone from the IPCC to David Suzuki to Al Gore and every socially-conscious celebrity on the planet have been telling us it is, then there can be no serious argument for Canada to make mandatory commitments, while exempting the giant emitters of the world such as China and India. This is like plugging a leak while ignoring a flood...

70 comments:

Platty said...

I'd rather beleive my Almanac, it says that we will have a warmer than average winter in the prairies.

Of course with it being between -20 and -30 all last week here, I'm starting to have second thoughts..:^/

I want my global warming!!



--

Barbara said...

The lefties will explain the coldest winter as proof of climate change. When global warming doesn't work, whip out the climate change card - it covers everything. I wish somebody would ask Dion why he didn't vote against the government if this is the worst diaster mankind is facing. If he really believes that, then there is no justification to have not gone into an election when he had the chance. His excuse was that Canadians didn't want an election- so that's more important than the future of mankind and the universe?? How can anybody take him seriously?

Steve V said...

joanne

By posting this, as a comment on global warming, all you do is expose your complete ignorance and lack of understanding of the issue. Congratulations.

Anonymous said...

You're missing an underlying problem.

We have not had enough rain (south east Ontario) this year. If it's too cold, we won't have enough snow either.

Believe it or not, the water levels are way down and we even had the possibility of being careful how much water we use - this was only 2 weeks ago.

This is farm land. There are woods/trees that need a lot of water.

Anonymous said...

wait for it folks.........it's all Mike Harris's fault.

Gabby in QC said...

"Environment Canada forecasts "coldest winter in almost 15 years"."

Hurray! I love winter!!!

" ... the worst ecological threat that humanity is facing ..."
Please! turn down the overheated verbiage, Mr. Dion.

Joe Calgary said...

South... where the beach is. Sounds good to me. I'm starting to get PMS (Pre-Motiontosuppress Schreiber) Syndrome. I need a vacation.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

By posting this, as a comment on global warming, all you do is expose your complete ignorance and lack of understanding of the issue.

I would accept that criticism if I hadn't heard so many Kyoto Kultists pointing to the warm weather last winter as evidence of global warming.

You can't have it both ways, my friend. ;)

Crabgräss said...

I'd be willing to bet that October was the warmest on record for southwestern Ontario.

Does anyone know?

I guess we'll know in March or so whether the Environment Canada forecast was any good.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

.I'd be willing to bet that October was the warmest on record for southwestern Ontario.

There's a perfect example of what I was trying to get at. The weather this past October was unseasonably warm; especially around Thanksgiving. Everyone was talking about it being a sign of global warming.

Yet if the weather gets bitterly cold, we're not allowed to point that out?

It's all just weather, but you can just bet if this had been a warm November, they'd all be saying "See?"

Anonymous said...

No, it's all George Bush's fault!

Anonymous said...

"By posting this, as a comment on global warming, all you do is expose your complete ignorance and lack of understanding of the issue. Congratulations."

Really? Do tell Steve V. This from the guy who thinks Dion going to Bali is brilliant strategy? Steve, here is what you need to do. Go out and buy Paul Well's book "Right Side Up". I'll loan you my copy if you need it. Now when you have it in hand turn to page 299. On that page you will find Dion stating that had the Liberals won the 2006 election, he would have had to tell Canadians the truth, that there was no way the Liberals would have met Kyoto. Think long and hard and maybe it might dawn on you that Kyoto was nothing more than a political stunt by Chretien and friends. Please explain that to us ignorant non-understanding deniers.

Once you are done reading that, check the 2005 report from the Enviroment Commissioner where 200+ pages explains the problems with Dions Green Plan, and why it would not come near to meeting Kyoto. Plaese explain that as well.

Now when you are done that explain to me why if the fate of the Earth hangs in the balance, Dion, Gore, Suzuki, etc., have no problem with China and India being exempted from any emissions reduction agreements, despite the fact China has opened over 100 coal-fired plants in the past year and has plans for 500+ more in the near future. And you do realize China is expected to pass the bad old U.S. as the worlds biggest emitter of ghg. Do explain Steve....

paulsstuff

Platty said...

Well said paulsstuff, you really need to start your own blog....


==

Tony said...

Excellent points, paulstuff. I think that Steve V have had too much of the Kyoto Koolaid.

The Liberals never had a viable plan for Canada to achieve the Kyoto target of 6% below 1990 GHG levels in the 13 years that they were in government.

Gabby in QC said...

For those still stuck on Kyoto:
1.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070929.whotair29/BNStory/National/home/
“ Canada made a commitment at Kyoto that was the most difficult and expensive in the world. It took no account of our economic growth, population growth, cold temperatures, vast distances, and fossil-fuel production; it contravened our federal system, because Ottawa broke a fragile federal-provincial consensus on the eve of the negotiations. So the first lesson must be to remember these factors - and therefore undertake international commitments and implement serious domestic policies that take these distinctly Canadian factors into account, because no other country has all these characteristics.”

2.
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/3788/
“ … ‘Cutting back carbon emissions’ is the goal to which virtually every Western politician, celebrity and youthful activist has committed himself. Yet for the poorest people around the world, ‘reducing carbon output’ means saying no to machinery and instead getting your family to do hard physical labour, or it involves collecting cow dung and burning it in an eco-stove in order to keep yourself warm. It is not only Climate Care that pushes through such patronising initiatives. Other carbon-offsetting companies have encouraged Kenyans to use dung-powered generators and Indians to replace kerosene lamps with solar-powered lamps, while carbon-offsetting tree-planting projects in Guatemala, Ecuador and Uganda have reportedly disrupted local communities’ water supplies, led to the eviction of thousands of villagers from their land, and cheated local people of their promised income for the upkeep of these Western conscience-salving trees.”

3.
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4096/
“ … while the headlines would suggest that the Greenland ice sheet is about to melt, catastrophically resulting in sea level rises of seven metres, the report [The IPCC final part of its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4)] makes clear that this process would take millennia. The report actually suggests that sea level will rise over the next century by 18-59 centimetres. Meanwhile, the report says: ‘Current global model studies project that the Antarctic ice sheet will remain too cold for widespread surface melting and gain mass due to increased snowfall.’ In other words, unless great chunks fall off the edge of the South Pole’s ice sheet, the mass of ice is likely to get bigger. While the overall rise in sea levels could still be damaging to very low-lying coastal areas, there will be no need to build an ark any time soon.

4. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.HTMLTemplate?current_row=28&tf=tgam/columnists/FullColumn.html&cf=tgam/columnists/FullColumn.cfg&configFileLoc=tgam/config&date=&dateOffset=&hub=margaretWente&title=Margaret_Wente&cache_key=margaretWente&start_row=28&num_rows=1
“… And finally - listen up, folks - global warming is not an imminent planetary emergency. It is one, but only one, of many challenges we need to tackle on a global basis. Two billion people still live without electricity, and three billion without clean drinking water and sanitation. In this century, malnutrition, disease, dirty water and lack of sanitation will kill far more people than global warming will.
Mr. Lomborg drives a lot of environmentalists crazy. It's easy to see why. He says, for instance, that international protocols such as Kyoto are entirely useless, because their impact is minuscule and nobody observes them anyway. In the short term - the next 50 or 100 years - cutting carbon dioxide emissions is environmentally inconsequential. That's not a matter of opinion. It's a highly inconvenient fact. "What we must come to terms with is that even though C02 causes global warming, cutting C02 simply doesn't matter much for most of the world's important issues," Mr. Lomborg argues.”

♪ Walking in a winter wonderland ♬

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Well said paulsstuff, you really need to start your own blog....

That's for sure. I think you had a blog at one time, didn't you Paul?

In any case, I am very grateful that you are here to give our friend Steve a reality check. (And you do it so eloquently!)

Anonymous said...

Thanks Joanne and Tony. I had a blog at one time but have not enough time as I have gone back to college to upgrade my Motive Power Technician license.(fancy term for grease monkey:0)). Not to mention being spammed to death.

I normally refrain from the name-calling(does happen on occasion), but prefer to research my position on topics by providing proof, something that Steve V and others seem to overlook when posting themselves. I never heard of this guy before but a quick look at his blog tells me all I need to know. A few examples:

1. Bashes Harper and Baird for intensity targets. Fact- Dion's Project Green plan as enviro-minister included the same intensity targets. He has now changed his tune because, well, whatever Harper does he thinks doing the opposite is what the opposition leader should do.

2. When Harper took office, the Liberals had allowed ghg emissions to increase roughly 35%, rather than a 6% reduction from 1990 levels. As Gabby pointed out, Canada's committment was the most costly and hardest to meet under Kyoto, but apparently Dion thinks Harper should be able to get the 6% reduction, PLUS the extra 35% the emissions rose under the Liberal government. If they couldn't do it, explain why Harper can.

3. I can't count how many times I have heard Liberal posters say its Harpers fault because he blocked every piece of legislation put forward to reduce ghg emissions. Do the math people. 1993-2004 Liberal's had a majority, meaning they could put forward and pass whatever Kyoto legislation they wanted. 2004-2006 Liberals had a minority and needed only the Bloc or NDP to pass same said legislation.

4. After some warm weather in November and December in 2006, Dion and Layton were spouting off everyday how it proved there was global warming. A cold-snap hit in January and carried on until early April. Nary a peep about global warming from either. And here is a little something to help Steve V out. I'm 47 years old and have lived in Ajax my entire life. I remember as a kid skating to school in April because of a late snowstorm. I remember playing road hockey in December and January wearing a t-shirt because of a warm-snap. Climate Change is real. Its been happening since the beginning of the planet.

5. Nobody, Harper and Conservatives included, deny that we are damaging the enviroment with all our pollution. And he has taken a balanced approach, not only reducing ghg, but smog problems, mercury, etc.

6. And I will repeat it again for Steve V. If the future of the planet depends on it, why does Dion, Gore, Suzuki, Layton, etc., not speak out about countries such as China building hundreds of new coal-fired plants. It has nothing to do with the fact Paul Martin and other Liberals have been setting up their own businesses over there is it?

7. Canada produces about 2% of world ghg emissions. When Harper pointed this out Liberals went crazy saying it doesn't matter. Its such a serious problem we still need to act. About a month later, Baird talked about banning regular lightbulbs and switching to cfl. He stated this would lower Canada's ghg emissions 1.5%-2%. And guess who criticised him for only having a 2% reduction from the plan? Hint:intials S.D.

paulsstuff

Anonymous said...

Steve V
Canadians did not elect the Lie-beral party as the governing party.


Florence

Lizt. said...

Glovbal warming means EXTREME weathers systems of drought, cold, heat floods, etc

Anonymous said...

Now the polar bears will get too cold! Curse you global warming!
(real conservative)

Anonymous said...

"Glovbal warming means EXTREME weathers systems of drought, cold, heat floods, etc"

Hate to break it to you lizt, but thats been happening for thousands of years, long before the first Model "T" drove down the road. And you should check your e-mail. Apparently you never get the memo. Its no longer global warming, its "CLIMATE CHANGE". Global warming is sooo 2006.

"Researchers with the Russian Academy of Sciences warned Wednesday that
the Earth could be headed for a 60-year cooldown, the news agency
Interfax reported.

Scientists based at the academy's Pulkovskaya Observatory in St
Petersburg, Russia, said they expected a gradual decrease in global
temperatures in 2012-15, followed by a more dramatic, 60-year period of
cold to come in 2055-60."

" The United States' National Academy of Sciences has reported it cannot
say with any certainty what has caused the current warming. Scientists
have noted a warming of the surface temperature appeared to have
occurred between the 1890s and 1940s, and that a 30-year period of
cooler temperatures followed."

" Global average temperatures have risen by about 0.6 °C in the past century, and until recently almost all of this has been put down to human activity. But that may not be the only factor at work. A growing number of scientists believe that there are clear links between the sun's activity and the temperature on Earth. While solar magnetic activity cannot explain away global warming completely, it does seem to have a significant impact. "A couple of years ago, I would not have said that there was any evidence for solar activity driving temperatures on Earth," says Paula Reimer, a palaeoclimate expert at Queen's University, Belfast, in the UK. "Now I think there is fairly convincing evidence."

What has won round Reimer and others is evidence linking climate to sunspots. These blemishes on the sun's surface appear and fade over days, weeks or months, depending on their size. More than a mere curiosity, they are windows on the sun's mood. They are created by contortions in the sun's magnetic field and their appearance foretells massive solar eruptions that fling billions of tonnes of gas into space. Fewer sunspots pop up when the sun is calm, and historically these periods have coincided with mini ice ages.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305_pf.html

Might I suggest LizT(SteveV?), that if you do not like the swings in temperature here in Canada, that perhaps you should look into buying a nice little piece of land on the equator.

paulsstuff

liberal supporter said...

Steve V
Canadians did not elect the Lie-beral party as the governing party.


Florence


Florence: Do you continue to claim the RT attended the Liberal Convention?

I do not see your retraction of this. Could you point it out to me?

Platty said...

How do you know that he did not attend ls? Did you not go with him? Why do you care anyway what someone says about the former blogger known as rt.

Platty said...

By posting this, as a comment on global warming, all you do is expose your complete ignorance and lack of understanding of the issue. Congratulations.

I think the congratulations should go to you steve, with your comment you exposed your ignorance, with your silence you have confirmed it.

Well done.


--

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I think the congratulations should go to you steve, with your comment you exposed your ignorance, with your silence you have confirmed it.

It is possible that Steve is one of the minions sent out to do the dirty work of certain other slimy bloggers...

liberal supporter said...

How do you know that he did not attend ls? Did you not go with him?

The question was not directed at you. Typical response though, instead of an answer, simply attack.

I actually haven't asked him if he went. Maybe he did, and Florence knows about it. Are we not allowed to ask questions? He never mentioned such a thing, and in his blog, he was supporting Dion before the convention, contrary to Florence's statement.

Why do you care anyway what someone says about the former blogger known as rt.

Why should you care to comment on my question to someone else?

Anonymous said...

"...If global warming is the imminent and catastrophic peril to the earth that everyone from the IPCC to David Suzuki to Al Gore and every socially-conscious celebrity on the planet have been telling us it is, then there can be no serious argument for Canada to make mandatory commitments, while exempting the giant emitters of the world such as China and India. This is like plugging a leak while ignoring a flood..."'


Now when you are done that explain to me why if the fate of the Earth hangs in the balance, Dion, Gore, Suzuki, etc., have no problem with China and India being exempted from any emissions reduction agreements, despite the fact China has opened over 100 coal-fired plants in the past year and has plans for 500+ more in the near future. And you do realize China is expected to pass the bad old U.S. as the worlds biggest emitter of ghg. Do explain Steve...."

"6. And I will repeat it again for Steve V. If the future of the planet depends on it, why does Dion, Gore, Suzuki, Layton, etc., not speak out about countries such as China building hundreds of new coal-fired plants. It has nothing to do with the fact Paul Martin and other Liberals have been setting up their own businesses over there is it?"

Looks like my questions for the Kyoto supporters is finally getting asked in the media. Of course I doubt if SteveV, LizT or the others will ever answer that.

Lets put it in better partisan perspective. Stephen Harper is leading the world on the path to the eve of destruction by refusing to cut emissions for Canada if China dores not have to reduce emissions as well. So if he cuts emissions and China keeps increasing theirs are we not dead anyway?

paulsstuff

Raphael Alexander said...

I think that saying a cold winter explains away global warming is as logically awry as saying a warm summer explains the same concept.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Raphael, my point was that if we have hot or unseasonably warm weather, the global warming supporters point to that as evidence of AGW.

Unfortunately for them, it would appear that they cannot do that this winter.

Perhaps that is what you are saying too.

I agree that weather does not equal climate change or global warming.

liberal supporter said...

I agree that weather does not equal climate change or global warming.

Good! You're half way there.

Do you also agree that weather does not equal a lack of climate change or global warming?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I agree that weather is a short-term phenomenon, and that climate change and global warming are issues that need to be looked at taking into account centuries of data.

I also wonder how Environment Canada can forecast a whole winter of weather when they can't even get it right for the next day.

Anonymous said...

Is it not becoming apparent to liberals and leftists that they do not know what is causing global warming? It makes no sense to seek solutions to a problem you do not at first understand. (real conservative)

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I have to leave the computer for a while, so comments won't get through til I get back.

Keep it going though. I'll let them through later. thanks.

liberal supporter said...

I agree that weather is a short-term phenomenon, and that climate change and global warming are issues that need to be looked at taking into account centuries of data.

And they say it's liberals who can't answer a simple question! You went from 12 words to agree with one premise, to 29 words to "sort of" agree with the opposite. I'm teasing of course.


I also wonder how Environment Canada can forecast a whole winter of weather when they can't even get it right for the next day.

I can't predict how long it will take me to get to work on any day, but I can give an average and a range. I think it is a similar problem. If there is road work, I can tell you it will take longer for a period of time.


They use data from the past to do seasonal predictions. Weather tends to go from west to east, because the earth spins that way and the atmosphere then rotates too, typically a little faster. So we will experience a lot of effect from the Pacific Ocean, which covers half the surface of the earth. Being water, there are water circulations as well as air.

They are probably basing predictions on it being La Nina conditions in the Pacific. From the NOAA site you can see how the jet stream is south of the Great Lakes, so we get the Arctic air. In El Nino, the jetstream stays north and we get less frigid air.

liberal supporter said...

Is it not becoming apparent to liberals and leftists

And we're back to "liberals and leftists" as a pejorative. Keep trying to poison the well of discourse. It won't work anymore.


do not know what is causing global warming?

Sounds like you do agree that there is something happening!

The scientists seem to think human activity related to fossil fuels is causing about 50% of it.

They could be wrong of course. That is not an excuse to do nothing in the meantime.


It makes no sense to seek solutions to a problem you do not at first understand.

True, but it happens all the time. I supported the invasion of Iraq, based on the reported intelligence that was "pretty sure" there were WMDs there. I don't agree with the view that anyone "lied" about it.

They certainly mishandled it though, partly due to not understanding the country. More importantly, little effort was made to understand the country.


In the climate sciences, they do continue to research and add to understanding. It makes plenty of sense to work on solutions based on what is known.

As the economic engines of the world, the developed countries have provided many decades of invention and innovation. We should be working on the technical solutions. Since the payback for such things is not in the next quarter, or even the next year, it is hard for any business to make the investments required. That is why having international agreements allows us to provide a somewhat level playing field among the developed countries.

We develop the technologies, then sell them and scale them up to the bigger countries.

Or we do nothing and watch China go from 4 tonnes per capita to our level of 22 tonnes per capita. Yes, then we will go from that miniscule 2% down to .4%. Yay!

We could wait for them to develop these technologies on their own, but when you consider they are just now entering the international automobile market, 100 years after the developed countries, we might have a long wait.

Raging Ranter said...

Steve V, I know how it works. If it's warmer than average, that's because of global warming. If it's colder than average, that's also because of global warming. I first heard this line of reasoning in Winnipeg in 1995-96. We had the hottest summer on record, followed by the coldest winter on record. The global warming alarmists all started singing the same tune:

"This is exactly what global warming means. It means we'll see more extremes at BOTH ends of the scale. We'll have more record highs AND more record lows. We'll have more dry spells AND more wet...blah blah blah blah."

And of course, it wasn't long before they changed their preferred label from global warming to "climate change". Now the climate change alarmists can scream from the rooftops when we have a hot spell, while explaining away unseasonably cold whether, or even enlisting that cold whether as more "proof" of global warming. They've created a theory in which average, isolated, unrelated events can all be commandeered as "evidence" that they are right.

That's the problem skeptics like myself have with the theory. It's too broad. It tries to explain too much. There are no criteria for defining exactly what constitutes global warming and what doesn't. There is too much reliance on computer models. And too many speculative hypotheses are presented as facts.

For your information, no one is arguing that a single cold winter is proof that global warming is a farce. What is important is that we rub the noses of all global warming alarmists in the snow, so they realize their habit of pointing to every hot spell and every hurricane as supporting evidence is as ridiculous as it is scientifically invalid.

Greg said...

I would accept that criticism if I hadn't heard so many Kyoto Kultists pointing to the warm weather last winter as evidence of global warming.

Look to the trends Joanne, not the exceptions. The sad fact is that the temperature trend is going up, not down. The fact that this story is news at all is because what used to be considered a "normal" winter is not anymore.

Now, if the next 15 winters are just like there were in the 60's you might have a point. Otherwise, this is a blip.

Möbius said...

He never mentioned such a thing, and in his blog, he was supporting Dion before the convention, contrary to Florence's statement.

My memory is a bit fuzzy, but I thought he was supporting Iggy before the convention, and was fairly neutral/mildly disappointed on Dion as the winner.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

And they say it's liberals who can't answer a simple question! You went from 12 words to agree with one premise, to 29 words to "sort of" agree with the opposite. I'm teasing of course.

And I'm practicing to be a politician. ;)

liberal supporter said...

My memory is a bit fuzzy, but I thought he was supporting Iggy before the convention, and was fairly neutral/mildly disappointed on Dion as the winner.

Well, it seems better than mine. He was for Iggy until October 27 and finally gave up, quite happy to stop holding his tongue! On November 30, the Star endorsed Bob Rae, and he-who-must-not-be-named-here "agreed for the same reasons". Mainly that Rae could win an election, and really it was considered to be Rae or Iggy at the time.

He did have a phone call with Dion on October 22, and seemed quite impressed with him.

He did "not so live blogging from the convention", making fun of Cherniak and others where were "live on the floor" while he-who-must-not-be-named-here had to watch the TV. He disapproved of the party not changing from the delegated system. He added up the costs and said he's paid less for a car than what it would be, and laughed at Cherniak trying to get donations for bus fare.

So I don't think he was there, but was not supporting Dion beforehand.

No, there are no pigs flying outside. I've been wrong before. Or half wrong in this case. Half apologies to Florence. But why did you say RT went then?

Anonymous said...

Hmmmmmmm, this is interesting This is what Dion said about Layton showing up at the climate conference in Montreal.

"Dion expressed distaste for the partisan conduct of NDP Leader Jack Layton, who showed up at a Montreal climate change conference chaired by Dion in 2005 and predicted the conference would fail due to Canada's lack of credibility on the issue.

"It was an attempt of sabotage," Dion said.

Hey SteveT, still think Dion showing up at Bali is "brilliant"?

paulsstuff

Raphael Alexander said...

If you look at the Goddard Space Institute statistics global warming you will notice that we are at the end of a periodic cycle of warmth. Having said that, my conclusion at the time was:

The fact is that since 1998 there has been, as correctly stated in the media, an unprecedented warming period. Certainly the Thirties bears some similarities, but until another decade goes by, we cannot rule out the possibility for either side. If temperatures begin to decline, as shown in the Goddard Institute's statistics should happen, then one can argue that global warming is a periodical and natural phenomenon we simply do not understand yet. But if temperatures continue to soar into 2017, I don't think there can be much refutation that man is having an adverse affect on the climate of the planet.

Kunoichi said...

The sad fact is that the temperature trend is going up, not down.

Actually, since 1998, global temperature averages have been steady, if not dropping slightly (when we're talking fractions of a degree, it's hard to be more exact than that).

The trend in the past 100 years has been well within past ranges. It's typical for temperatures to increase as much as 2C within 100 years, and we've only increased by about .6C.

Of course, those are just global averages, with are an abstract concept anyways, since no one temperature or climate can represent the entire globe. The southern hemisphere has been seeing record cold temperatures, while the northern hemisphere has seen increases. This is the opposite of what was happening during the little cooling of the 70's, when the northern hemisphere cooled, but the southern hemisphere warmed.

As solar activity has a much stronger correlation than GHGs when it comes to global temperature, the next 2-10 years should be interesting to see. Solar cycle 23 has ended, but SC24 hasn't started yet. An "all quiet" was announced back on Oct. 5th - there were no sun spots at all. Last time I checked (a few days ago), there were still no sun spots. There's a good chance we'll be looking at some *very* cold weather in the northern hemisphere in a short time. Another cooling like the 70's? Or another 300 yr Little Ice Age? No one really knows. We simply don't know enough about climate to accurately make any predictions.

Anonymous said...

I'm a climate change denier and proud of it.

That means I haven't been taken in by hyterics and junk science, or those who stand to fill their pockets because it's trendy to scare people rather than present them with the facts.....ALL the facts...just not those convenient to bias.

Anonymous said...

Check out Greg Weston's column today.

First we have Dion being compared to a carrot, then, taking on the characteristics of a lemming, now Weston wants to know if Dion is a dumb cluck?

Yes Greg, yes, he is.

I wonder where the Liberals will get the cash to finance their spring take down of the Harper gov't???

Hey, perhaps we can put Dion in touch with a certain German jailbird??

Joanne (True Blue) said...

First we have Dion being compared to a carrot, then, taking on the characteristics of a lemming, now Weston wants to know if Dion is a dumb cluck?


lol! Weston link here.


I'd do a post on it, but I'm too exhausted from shoveling a big dump of global warming out there.

FYI, that was a joke, Steve!

Anonymous said...

I would personally like to apologize to all Canadian carrots for the uncalled for slur against their reputations.

paulsstuff

liberal supporter said...

I wonder where the Liberals will get the cash to finance their spring take down of the Harper gov't???

First they'd like to find out where Harper got the cash for his own leadership campaign.

Möbius said...

The scientists seem to think human activity related to fossil fuels is causing about 50% of it.

They could be wrong of course. That is not an excuse to do nothing in the meantime.


Why do you support a party that has done just that?

I would assume you'd be either "NDP" or "Green" supporter, in the hopes that they may actually do something.

Platty said...

liberal supporter said:

First they'd like to find out where Harper got the cash for his own leadership campaign.

Of course liberal supporter also said this earlier on in this same thread:

Typical response though, instead of an answer, simply attack.

Typical indeed....


==

Möbius said...

And the reason why the Liberals did nothing on such a crucial file?

How about gasoline at 2$ - 3$ per litre? Same increases in the price of natural gas or oil or electricity for heating our homes.

These are necessary costs to get us off of fossil fuels, but no government will get elected (including the CPC) if they face this reality.

Had the Liberals acted on Kyoto, would it have been as easy for the CPC to back away from it?

liberal supporter said...

Typical indeed....
Nice try, platty. Some anon sneers where will the Liberals get money for a campaign. Since they are "anon", I cannot snidely bring up some earlier comment to try and smear them.

What sort of response would be acceptable to you as not being a "typical attack" ? Your anon was attacking. Should I not defend? Are we not allowed to?

Feel free to take my words out of context, it certainly is typical. The quote you gleefully provide was in connection to a specific question, where there should be an answer possible, not a rhetorical one. And yes, I am no longer beating my wife.

Typical indeed!

liberal supporter said...

Why do you support a party that has done just that?

Funny how people will search for quotes to smear me when it suits them, while in this case you can't be bothered.

I do not support the party that "does nothing". That would be the CPC, with its obstructing and weasel words on this.

Contrary to your "doing nothing" meme, there was a lot of groundwork required to prepare. Kind of like building a house. From when they start to dig until the house is done is fast. But It can take an equal or longer time to prepare.

Same situation with preparing for Kyoto. Lots of groundwork. Not the least of which was getting the money in order. We had a 40 BILLION a year deficit, and now have a 10 BILLION a year surplus.

So the seeds were planted. Now Stephen Harper "picks the flowers", frittering it away on a GST cut. That money was intended to pay for the tax incentives for developing the technologies needed.

Anonymous said...

"So the seeds were planted. Now Stephen Harper "picks the flowers", frittering it away on a GST cut. That money was intended to pay for the tax incentives for developing the technologies needed.

Sun Dec 02, 06:12:00 PM EST"

Nice try. Dion has already stated the money from the gst cut was what the Liberals were going to use for National Daycare Plan.

"I do not support the party that "does nothing". That would be the CPC, with its obstructing and weasel words on this."

Again, do the math. Liberal majority 1993-2004. Liberal minority 2004-2006. If Harper prevented Kyoto legislation from passing under the Liberals he is more brilliant than I thought.

"Same situation with preparing for Kyoto. Lots of groundwork. Not the least of which was getting the money in order. We had a 40 BILLION a year deficit, and now have a 10 BILLION a year surplus."

Who picked the flowers? Do a search on how much revenue the GST brings in, compared to the manufacturing tax it replaced. Nafta created thousands upon thousands of jobs for Canada, which in turn provides tax revenue and strong stimulation for the economy. Hey, weren't the Liberals against the GST and Nafta.

Any idea on when Mark Holland will be travelling to NFLD/Labrador to tell Danny Williams if he doesn't put a slowdown on the provinces oil industry the Liberal party will?

paulsstuff

Donna said...

"Liberal minority 2004-2006"

Just an added comment - if the Liberals didn't do it when they had a majority - they still could have done it with their minority because they would have had the NDP and Bloc on their sides.

As has been said -

They didn't get it done, but then, do you think it is easy to set priorties!!!!

Platty said...

Nice try?

No, it fits, wear it.

Kind of like building a house. From when they start to dig until the house is done is fast. But It can take an equal or longer time to prepare.

What?? I build houses for a living ls, if my company operated as you suggest, I'd have been out of business a long time ago. I guess your scenario fits the Liberal party in this case though....


==

liberal supporter said...

build houses for a living ls, if my company operated as you suggest, I'd have been out of business a long time ago.

So you don't have plans done? You don't get building permits? How about sewage and conservation permits? That can take at least a month.

And what of the financing, which was the point I was making. People just impulse buy from you? Nobody saves up for a couple of years?

Maybe the rich folks can just make a phone call and have a house in hours. The rest of us save up our down payment for at least a year.

Platty said...

So you don't have plans done? You don't get building permits? How about sewage and conservation permits? That can take at least a month.

Plans take a week for me to get, start to finish. I just got back from the city planners office for a new property we are starting this week, all permits are now in hand, about 45 minutes. Any other permits are obtained during construction. I would suggest you do a little more research before making excuses for the lack of action taken on the environmental file by past Liberal governments.


==

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I just got back from the city planners office for a new property we are starting this week, all permits are now in hand, about 45 minutes.

Liberals dither; Conservatives do.

liberal supporter said...

Plans take a week for me to get, start to finish. I just got back from the city planners office for a new property we are starting this week, all permits are now in hand, about 45 minutes. Any other permits are obtained during construction. I would suggest you do a little more research before making excuses for the lack of action taken on the environmental file by past Liberal governments.

It was an analogy. I would suggest you do a little more research into how to present an argument.

So in 45 minutes, you can go from a farmer's field to an approved plan of subdivision, master servicing agreement, and approved site plans, grading plans and building permits for each of the lots?

Amazing!

Most builders have sites under construction, and have plans and approvals in the pipeline. But for one project, you do need your ducks in a row before starting.

For waterfront property in areas without sewers, you do need more time to get approvals in place. Mine took 9 weeks, and it was considered quick. In adjacent municipalities the time is said to be longer.

And most buyers will be busy saving money for a year before.

All this to illustrate that you may see little visible action, while in fact much is being done to prepare.



Liberals dither; Conservatives do.
When Liberals are bad, someone steals. When Conservatives are bad, someone dies.

I thought you wanted a higher level of discourse. Let me know (by the way you say things) when that is in effect.

Platty said...

When Liberals are bad, someone steals. When Conservatives are bad, someone dies.

Someone dies??

Could you explain this little bit of wisdom? Feel free to point out any examples that you might have. Be careful now, you might just....well, nevermind, we'll just wait until you bestow some of that Liblogic on us.

The floor is all yours.


==

liberal supporter said...

You really don't get it, do you?

Every time somebody spouts off mindless rhetoric favouring the CPC, you are silent. But anyone who responds in kind is immediately attacked, and expected to defend the sarcastic view as if it was anything but a response to someone else's nonsense.

But, in that vein, this is the whole problem with the CPC from Stephen Harper on down:

You just don't get it.

Möbius said...

Funny how people will search for quotes to smear me when it suits them, while in this case you can't be bothered.

I didn't have to search for quotes, it's right up there ^^. I just found it terribly amusing.

As for smears, you are getting positively sensitive. A smear is saying something like "Heil Harper!".

In the years between signing the accord, and the end of the Liberal era of majority government (nearly 10 years), emissions increased by more than 30%. If it was so GD important, we should have seen a carbon tax, and some other efforts towards reducing CO2 outputs. Incremental efforts at that stage would have been somewhat effective. I'm not naive, I know why it wasn't done. It's a little hard on election-readiness to start taxing energy appropriately.

When Ernie Eves started talking about freezing electricity prices in Ontario, he lost my vote.

Platty said...

Remember your original comment ls,


Kind of like building a house. From when they start to dig until the house is done is fast. But It can take an equal or longer time to prepare.

My point is that there is no way it would take longer to plan than to build a house. We started in a new sub division this year, which intersting enough, had been a farmers field just recently. One and a half months from stuble to digging the basement. If you can build a house in one and a half months, you have a job for life in my company, name your price!!


==

--

Platty said...

Every time somebody spouts off mindless rhetoric favouring the CPC, you are silent. But anyone who responds in kind is immediately attacked, and expected to defend the sarcastic view as if it was anything but a response to someone else's nonsense.

Who doesn't get it here ls??
You come on here and spout out crap like mindless rhetoric and expect everyone to say, "your so right there ls". Im sure if you head over to liblogs you will not find anything in the way of attacks on the Conservative comments.

Right?

Should we go over and check??

No??

Didn't think so....


==

liberal supporter said...

My point is that there is no way it would take longer to plan than to build a house.

My point is that it can and has. You're right of course in textbook cases though. And though not as clear as it should have been, I was referring to things like saving up a down payment, which is alluding to cleaning up the national finances to prepare.

Möbius said...

You really don't get it, do you?

Every time somebody spouts off mindless rhetoric favouring the CPC, you are silent. But anyone who responds in kind is immediately attacked, and expected to defend the sarcastic view as if it was anything but a response to someone else's nonsense.


What the hell are you going on about? I occasionally comment on some Lib-leaning sites, and frequently get attacked for it.

Go to any Liblog, and you'll see the same partisanship in effect. If you simply spout Lib talking points on conservative sites, you'll definitely get some response.

I write non-partisan posts here, frequently critical of the CPC, and Joanne simply asks me to explain myself more clearly.

If, on balance, I don't agree with the party policies, I will not vote for it. I include the PC party (in '93), and the CPC's, if necessary. If the Libs move back to the centre, I could even vote for them.

Tell me what you don't like about the current Liberal party?

Möbius said...

And don't do the old job interview response:

"What is my greatest fault? It's that I can't stop working hard, long hours, for a company I love."

Platty said...

You're right of course...

Now that's more like it!!

;>)

===

liberal supporter said...

Should we go over and check??

No??

Didn't think so....

I'll have to take your word for it.

Liblogs is not a blogger site, so I will not go there. Just as I won't go to bloggingtories, sda or any other site where the blog operator can track you without a court order.