31,000 scientists reject 'global warming' agenda
"More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting "global warming," the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate."
"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate," the petition states. "Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64734
Cap and Trade and other taxation schemes based upon the farce of Anthropogenic global warming will add hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars of tax burden on American energy consumers. We must reject these schemes and focus on energy independence, not squeezing even more dimes out of the already overburdened members of productive society.
"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate," the petition states. "Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64734
Cap and Trade and other taxation schemes based upon the farce of Anthropogenic global warming will add hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars of tax burden on American energy consumers. We must reject these schemes and focus on energy independence, not squeezing even more dimes out of the already overburdened members of productive society.
Views: 180
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Iris on
-
Hi Dorch! Yes my Daddy probably attended a one room school, yet I agree with Sesport, do we need to keep doing the "same 'ol thing" over & over with regards to environment? That is insanity regardless of 31,000 over educated scientists..
-
Permalink Reply by Dorcheated A1 on
-
Oh Tiger Shark,
It's going to be just fine. I would worry more about the debt we are leaving your grandson, not the planet.
-
Permalink Reply by Dorcheated A1 on
-
sesport,
I'll say this. when our mother and fathers were attending one class school rooms, the graduation rate was at probably 90%, now that we spend 20 times more on kids, where lucky if they graduate at 50%. I'm not very good at math but even a dropout can figure those rates out. You don't need more money, you need better parents and teachers and kids.
-
Permalink Reply by Dorcheated A1 on
-
Great,
We spend more per kid per capita, and we are ranked about 30th in the world. There's your cap and trade tax. No complaints.
-
Permalink Reply by sesport on
-
My comment regarding schools was simply to illustrate how in order for change to come about it must be funded. Okay, let's not have a cap & trade, not pass on the tax to consumers. Let's just keep doing what we've always been doing. Now we don't even have to drill the Haynesville Shale for gas ... we've got coal. Lucky us.
-
Permalink Reply by sesport on
-
You know what, on second thought, let's work on that education budget, get the government out of our pockets. How about we start with cutting the costs to repair & upgrade air conditioning? We won't replace other aging things either, like lights, asbestos laden floors, energy inefficient windows. And we'll forget about those air conditioned buses, too. Actually, why have buses at all, everyone can walk to school!
Now, let's see, how did it used to be in that one-room school house? Ah, yes, let's cut all the art & athletic programs, too. We won't have to pay for those teachers. And we can cut the custodial staff, go back to the way it was, teachers can do all the cleaning & maintenance. (Yes, they used to do that.) (Uh-oh, this is going to add to unemployment.) Better scrap the textbook budget, too. At about $40 -$80 each, we can scratch in the dirt or on slates. Did I forget anything?
-
Permalink Reply by sesport on
-
YIKES! I just realized, if we do away with air conditioning, we' probably have to change the dress codes for the months it's hot.
Okay, all the boys can just wear Speedos to school. The girls will have to be scantily clad, too, so I guess they'll have to be allowed to wear their bikinis. Might be a side benefit to this, kids will be more interested in staying in school at the high school level.
Hey, you parents out there, is it okay for your kids, especially your daughters, to attend school being scantily clad in warmer months?
-
Permalink Reply by Dorcheated A1 on
-
sesport,
Wow, relax and have a nother cup of coffee. I know in Bossier they usually build new schools, when they get old, maybe you can talk Cedric into a new scholl for your area. That's right you'll have to wait until they finnish installing the AC in all the buses, We wouldn't want little Johhny to sweaty would we. Give me a freaking break!!
-
Permalink Reply by sesport on
-
So, we can agree to disagree on this issue, then. And thank you for saying it to me more respectfully this time.
-
Permalink Reply by Dorcheated A1 on
-
sesport,
Don't forget, respect is a two street, you have to give it, to get it
I don't see where in any of my posts disrespect was shown. If stating a fact is somehow disrespectful then so be it. If you feel the need to pay the tax, write a check and make yourself feel better. After all it will make you feel patriotic -
-
Permalink Reply by P.G. on
-
The argument is over what some want to do, or cram down everyone's throat, to protect the environment.
Needlessly doing very expensive things that will do little good in protecting the environment isn't right either is it?
Especially when those demanding it be done stand to gain the most financially!
If the government was serious about this, they wouldn't need to tax carbon dioxide, but simply ban it!
If coal is bad, ban it! If petroleum is bad, ban it! If using it is destroying the environment, then it's DESTROYING the environment! Taxing it is NOT going to keep it from destroying the environment. Only Banning it could do that!
Imagine waking up in the middle of the night and the electricity going off? So you turn on the battery powered radio and they say the electricity will be back on in the year 2020?
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Blog Posts
The Lithium Connection to Shale Drilling
Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…
ContinuePosted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Miller County, Arkansas
27 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
South Caddo Parish Group
440 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
244 members
-
Fayetteville Shale
149 members
-
North Caddo Parish
358 members
-
Central Texas Gas
63 members
-
Cass County, TX
119 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
