Posted on 11/23/2018 3:37:57 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
There is no such concept as a Federal scientist.
Just ask any university. “I want to be a Federal scientist.” Which curriculum?
Now, there may be a complement of scientists who are unable to get legitimate work somewhere because of their incompetence and are hired by some government agency.
Were these “Federal Weathermen” making this proclamation from an NYC balcony in today’s FREEZING weather?
Eddie Bernice? This will be the source of real zingers. She makes Hank Johnson look like a rocket scientist.
heap of trouble
None of us will live long enough to experience it if it happens.
New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone, who is in line to chair the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He added: "The days of denial and inaction in the House are over as House Democrats plan to aggressively address climate change and hold the Administration accountable for its backward policies that only make it worse.”
New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone, incoming chairman of the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee -- backed by a number of other committee members -- slammed the creation of the new climate panel, according to multiple sources in the room. Pallone argued that his committee and other existing panels within the House could take on the issue aggressively.
I’m with you Robert. Which is why I retired to South Carolina.
But we can FIX IT if we agree to Trillions in BS GREEN taxes, right?
"Federal scientists need and thus constantly seek, Federal funding."
As a side note to this thread, please consider the following as it concerns federal funding for environmental issues.
Noting that Pres. Trump has little no choice but to surround himself with post-FDR era, institutionally indoctrinated constitutional “experts,” Trump is probably not aware of the following.
Since the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification feds the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for environmental reasons, federal involvement in environment is unconstitutional imo.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
"The smart crooks long ago figured out that getting themselves elected to federal office to make unconstitutional tax laws to fill their pockets is a much easier way to make a living than robbing banks." —me
"Federal career lawmakers probably laugh all the way to the bank to deposit bribes for putting loopholes for the rich and corporations in tax appropriations laws, Congress actually not having the express constitutional authority to make most appropriations laws where domestic policy is concerned. Such laws are based on stolen state powers and uniquely associated stolen state revenues." —me
“Just my theory: All that energy, in the form of heat, goes into the atmosphere. Low pressure systems occur when an air mass warms. Increased human activity may be increasing those low pressure areas and causing wild weather conditions.”
No. Human activity is a rounding error for global climate. Has some local impact in cesspools like LA. But globally? Just no.
Example 1: an average hurricane releases about 10 megatons (as in a big nuke) of energy every 20 minutes or so.
Example 2: a big wildfire releases more CO2 than the US produces in a few years. We just saw one enabled by these idiots.
Example 3: a big volcanic explosion releases more CO2 than all of mankind has since the start of the industrial revolution. Other much more powerful “greenhouse” gasses, too.
Example 4: If the US cut CO2 emissions to zero, it wouldn’t be a blip on what China emits. And even the CO2 they emit does not more than influence local phenomena. (Note: the polution China emits actually can have global implication - but that’s a different issue the “environmentalists” apparently don’t care about.)
Too tired of posting links few read. Look it up yourself.
The take away: We’re gnats on the global scale.
A recent core drill in Greenland showed that during the Cretaceous period 60 million to 100 million years ago had temperatures 4° warmer than today and carbon in the atmosphere was 4 times greater than today.
California just had a carbon use auction that raised 900 million dollars. This is all about money. Someone made a fortune in commissions on this deal.
It’s all Al Gore BS that gullible liberals are falling for and promoting with gusto.
Meanwhile, we’re experiencing “record cold” over the Thanksgiving weekend here in the northeast - just as predicted by the global warming snake oil salesmen.......
Thanks for posting, ya beat me to it. +1,000.
Let’s pretend a complete collection of climate change claims is true (I don’t care which of their many claims, but pick any one set of dire but mutually-consistent predictions):
Wine grapes grow almost exclusively between 30 and 50 degrees latitude north and south of the equator.
Citrus fruits are mainly grown in California, Arizona, Florida, and Texas.
Apples are grown commercially in 32 states. The 10 top apple-producing states are: Washington, New York, Michigan, Pennsylvania, California, Virginia, North Carolina, Oregon, Ohio, Idaho.
Corn is grown in most U.S. States, but production is concentrated in the Heartland region (including Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, eastern portions of South Dakota and Nebraska, western Kentucky and Ohio, and the northern two-thirds of Missouri).
Soybeans are grown mainly in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Indiana, and Ohio, although again they are grown in many other states.
Wheat is grown in quantity in Kansas, Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Indiana, Ohio, and a dozen other states.
We also have barley, oats, and a long list of other crops. If we cannot shift crops perhaps 50 miles north or possibly grow a different strain of wheat or even switch to barley . . . If we cannot adapt in the course of a century - four generations to a possible two degree increase in temperature, we deserve the losses.
Methinks the persons who wrote this crap are full of sht!
A little Gorebull warming would be nice here in Vermont. Yesterday, we had the coldest Thanksgiving on record right here, and I was out shoveling the driveway much of the day.
I read a few days ago a Solar Scientist with a history of 90% accurate predictions making the claim the sun is going into an unusually cold minimum sunspot period. The model used has the sun going into this in 2020 and not coming out for about 4 centuries. If true an abundance of any green house gases would be a blessing in disguise.
It’s already impacted us economically. Mainly because the government has imposed regulations purporting to prevent climate change and the government has spent so much money studying climate change.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.