Posts: 1,120
Threads: 57
Joined: Mar 2013
Open-d: "You are Americans and deserve not to be scammed by the elite who wish to reduce you...to serfdom. The global warming scam is just one facet of this process."
It is not much the "global warming scam." Nor is it the "elite." And there is no big erosion of freedom. Huge exaggerations and worse--they are misdirected.
- - - -
The real problem: Fairly pernicious and damaging constraints on reasonable economic activity by environmental extremists who enacted a web of regulations that demand Environmental Impact Statements for almost anything. One main tool: The National Environment Policy Act of 1970.
Example: Decaying Uncle Billy's hotel needs to be torn down. It contains asbestos. Construction companies know exactly what to do. It is their expertise. But taxpayers have to spend $1 million and wait 2 years to please environmentalists.
T-H story: "Another study will be needed before the former Uncle Billy’s Hilo Bay Hotel site can be redeveloped.... $1 million or more will be sought from the state Legislature....fund the environmental assessment or impact statement regarding demolition...
https://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/201...velopment/
This nonsense happens daily in the U.S. and adds huge costs to a variety of projects, including public interest initiatives (roads, parks). Construction companies know environmental safeguards; they don't need an expensive study every time to instruct them. Studies that often raise embellished environmental concerns. Worse, in some cases, such as coastal modification projects that would provide Hawaii beachgoers with new amenities, EIS rules can completely derail projects.
The cadre of environmental consultants writing these studies remind me--mildly--of the old organized crime scams in 1980s NY that tripled the cost of garbage collection; these people did not produce anything of value, merely stole from taxpayers. They're both rackets.
And a whole other larger group of environmentalists are gratified: They are engaging in their main hobby: Blocking or delaying projects.
Posts: 785
Threads: 6
Joined: Apr 2012
Some of you guys are starting to sound like the thought police. Open-d has stated that he has doubts about global climate change, the extent of it and its consequences. I suspect that none of you who are berating him have conducted any climate modeling yourselves, and so have elected to believe the dire consequences allegedly being forecast by these models; Open-d has elected not to, as is his right. I have interacted with some who work in this field, and some of those have pointed out that for many of these models, very small changes in the assumptions or in the coupling of one process with another can yield wildly different outcomes. The gospel of the idiot left only focuses on the most dire forecasts and ignores those that are less so. In one model, the forecast for the future climate in Hawaii was that there would be a 40% decrease in rainfall; same model, small change in coupling, yielded a 40% increase in rainfall. Open-d's skepticism seems to have some basis in reality...
Of course, the media, and media whores, only focus on the results that show an existential threat to humanity... do they believe that? If they really believe that continued combustion of fossil carbon fuels presents an existential threat to humanity, then why aren't we building nuclear power plants to replace the coal and oil plants - maybe we'll have a few more cancers if there's a leak, but they're not a threat to the continued survival of humans on the planet. More locally, if burning fossil fuels is so damaging to the environment, why do we not have an interisland cable carrying geothermal power to the other islands - yeah, it might inconvenience some folks on the rift zone, where, as has recently been demonstrated, they shouldn't be living in the first place - but if global climate change is such a threat to our survival, what's a little inconvenience? If it's such a threat, why are we having so much strife over the construction of a biomass power plant - it's not perfect, but a damned sight closer to carbon neutral than oil fired power plants that generate the majority of the power on the island... So it seems that even the ones squawking the loudest about protecting the environment aren't really all that concerned...
Open-d makes a valid point - the eco-fascists, who can't get elected to office, still want to make all the rules governing what businesses are acceptable, how we grow our food, and how our tax dollars are being spent. What offends them about the bottling plant - I did watch some of the video - is that someone might actually make some money that they aren't getting a cut of... Their objections ranged from the irrelevant (there's plastic waste in the ocean...) to the absurd (oh, the well is going to contaminate the aquifer: there's 4500 wells that have been drilled into various aquifers in Hawaii - is this one somehow different from all those???) or the withdrawal of water from the aquifer will deprive the ocean of nutrients - at the depth that water discharges, there are more nutrients in the ocean water than there are in water being discharged...). Nothing more than eco- ethno-extortion....(it's a public trust resource, $100,000 isn't just compensation for the damage that would be done...Damage? what damage?? the water is going to be released into the ocean with no f'ing benefit to anyone or anything...). If one went to the trouble of invalidating all the nonsensical objections to the use of the water, they would quickly cook up even more...
quote:
Originally posted by glinda
You better watch out RwR, Open is the chapter head of the Comma squad. If you screw up, drop even one of 'em, dat buggah gonna swoop down on you big time. And, besides, he has one of the few, SBD recording of the first time we chanted Lock Her Up! Not some DAT frickin' taper's AUD source, the guy has SBD! Can you imagine? OMG you wouldn't want to screw THAT up, would you?
The BS you spew. One time I criticized
one of your unpunctuated jabbers!!!
I wonder how all the arsenic just above factors in. I can see a great tactic / strategy forming already. Until that time, go to the park late afternoon and feeds the pigs. Newest petting zoo.
Posts: 10,988
Threads: 749
Joined: Sep 2012
I suspect that none of you who are berating him have conducted any climate modeling yourselves
No I haven’t.
But I treat the climate models like hurricane models.
I don’t create one from scratch, but I look over the spaghetti models, which can be wildly variable when the storm is 5 days out. I see what the average consensus is, I look at the cone of uncertainty, and I pay attention to changes from one day to the next as the storm approaches.
Sure, there are some who run out and buy up all the water and toilet paper (those who elect to believe the most dire of consequences) and the media, yes, even Guy Hagi promotes a SEVERE WEATHER worst case scenario so eyeballs stay glued to the TV screen.
Then there are others (like the climate change deniers) who make no preparations whatsoever, or believe the magic mana of Mauna Kea & Mauna Loa will protect us.
But there are plenty of people between those two extremes. When they prepare for a hurricane they have some food and water, a tank full of gas, and are ready whether a storm hits or not. Probably the most intelligent of the bunch.
In the case of climate change, unlike a hurricane where it’s either the destruction of an Iselle or almost nothing, the consequences will far more likely be somewhere between a worst case projection and the delusional fever dream of climate deniers where magic Ayn Rand saves us all.
If that’s the case, we need to do something rather than nothing.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 4,848
Threads: 83
Joined: Feb 2009
For me it still goes back to this:
"Climate warming is expected to result in rising sea level. Should this occur, coastal cities, ports, and wetlands would be threatened with more frequent flooding, increased beach erosion, and saltwater encroachment into coastal streams and aquifers. Global sea level has fluctuated widely in the recent geologic past. It stood 4-6 meters above the present during the last interglacial period, 125,000 years ago, but was 120 m lower at the peak of the last ice age, around 20,000 years ago. A study of past sea level fluctuations provides a longer-term geologic context, which can help us better anticipate future trends."
It's coming down the track, we can impose draconian measures to try and prevent it but we would be better off to just move uphill.
quote:
Originally posted by Obie
For me it still goes back to this:
"Climate warming is expected to result in rising sea level. Should this occur, coastal cities, ports, and wetlands would be threatened with more frequent flooding, increased beach erosion, and saltwater encroachment into coastal streams and aquifers. Global sea level has fluctuated widely in the recent geologic past. It stood 4-6 meters above the present during the last interglacial period, 125,000 years ago, but was 120 m lower at the peak of the last ice age, around 20,000 years ago. A study of past sea level fluctuations provides a longer-term geologic context, which can help us better anticipate future trends."
It's coming down the track, we can impose draconian measures to try and prevent it but we would be better off to just move uphill.
Exactly, but that doesn't give the control-freak-class pretext to impose their will upon the people. Making you live a small, more-restricted, however, does. Which do you think they will opt for?
Speaking Truth to Lies / Facts to Ignorance
quote:
Originally posted by MarkD
Open-d: "You are Americans and deserve not to be scammed by the elite who wish to reduce you...to serfdom. The global warming scam is just one facet of this process."
It is not much the "global warming scam." Nor is it the "elite." And there is no big erosion of freedom. Huge exaggerations and worse--they are misdirected.
- - - -
The real problem: Fairly pernicious and damaging constraints on reasonable economic activity by environmental extremists who enacted a web of regulations that demand Environmental Impact Statements for almost anything. One main tool: The National Environment Policy Act of 1970.
Example: Decaying Uncle Billy's hotel needs to be torn down. It contains asbestos. Construction companies know exactly what to do. It is their expertise. But taxpayers have to spend $1 million and wait 2 years to please environmentalists.
T-H story: "Another study will be needed before the former Uncle Billy’s Hilo Bay Hotel site can be redeveloped.... $1 million or more will be sought from the state Legislature....fund the environmental assessment or impact statement regarding demolition...
https://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/201...velopment/
This nonsense happens daily in the U.S. and adds huge costs to a variety of projects, including public interest initiatives (roads, parks). Construction companies know environmental safeguards; they don't need an expensive study every time to instruct them. Studies that often raise embellished environmental concerns. Worse, in some cases, such as coastal modification projects that would provide Hawaii beachgoers with new amenities, EIS rules can completely derail projects.
The cadre of environmental consultants writing these studies remind me--mildly--of the old organized crime scams in 1980s NY that tripled the cost of garbage collection; these people did not produce anything of value, merely stole from taxpayers. They're both rackets.
And a whole other larger group of environmentalists are gratified: They are engaging in their main hobby: Blocking or delaying projects.
All the things you describe are part and parcel of the situation, and only just the beginning.
I remember hearing a few years ago about a person who was fined in the order of $200,000 for collecting water from his room, and thereby depriving it from the waterway system....and this was in America!!
They are slow-boiling us gradually raising the temp, degree by degree. It is the nature and history of mankind, with only a few exception, USA for one.
It may be fashionable to scoff at such warnings, but it is NOT fashionable to be fined $200,000, or deprived the use of your land because a kangaroo rat was seen on it. Mind you, you still have to pay the taxes, and mortgage, if any.
Speaking Truth to Lies / Facts to Ignorance
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 39
Joined: Oct 2016
quote:
Originally posted by he who Speaks Truth to Lies / Facts to Ignorance
They are slow-boiling us gradually raising the temp, degree by degree.
By Jove, I think you've discovered the cause of global warming.
|
