Say Anything Blog

No Way!

I think the Automakers should work towards not selling their products in that state of California anymore or at the very least San Francisco/Berkeley CA.

What they should do, Paul, is ad a $3,000 surcharge to every vehicle sold in the state of California and tell customers that they have to do it to cover legal fees (and potential settlements) resulting from this case.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Or they could just develop ways to lower the emissions

I object to CA trying to set emission standards on their own (and I live here).
Seems to me the Interstate Commerce Clause would clearly place this in the Federal arena.

Or they could just develop ways to lower the emissions

California could do that by manipulating their emission laws, no?  Why the need to sue?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

fair point

What they should do, Paul, is ad a $3,000 surcharge to every vehicle sold in the state of California and tell customers that they have to do it to cover legal fees (and potential settlements) resulting from this case.

wishful thanking!

ROB, any auto maker that does what you suggest is practically doing what Paul L. suggest

Since the Global Warming Hypothesis contains no provable and quantifiable cause and effect relationship, there is no way to quantify the damages in this case.  Therefore, this is an outright attempt by the radical enviros to rip us all off to advance their agenda.
This is a clear example of socialists attempting to accomplish their goals by limiting supply.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

If there were a significant demand among citizens for vehicles that didn’t emit greenhouse gases we’d have had those vehicles long ago. ... pretty much every citizen of this country uses greenhouse gas emitting vehicles.

Because everyone does it, everyone should always do it?  That’s a superb argument for the status quo.

It reminds me of the lawsuits aimed at gun manufacturers because guns are used to commit crimes.

Toss it.

Those of you who missed this thread on Kos, don’t understand how things work.  See, facts alone don’t mean anything to the left because they KNOW what the truth is.  In fact, according to some of the commenters, the lack of facts is proof of something in and of itself.  The lone voice f sanity in that discussion kept repeating, “Since we are the reality-based community, we need to have proof of the things we allege.  Just because we believe something is true doesn’t mean it is.” OF course, he was attacked for being sane.

The movie Serial summed it up nicely, “In an insane world, a sane man will appear insane.”

This is stupid in more ways than I can explain.

But I’ll Try.

Lawyers with not enough to do.

Too many Lawyers.

Shakespere, “First kill all the lawyers”.

THEN:

The evidence is piling up that there is no possible way that MAN influences Global Warming. 
All this greenhouse gas thing is just HOT AIR.  That may contribute.

Example, Try taking a leak in the ocean.  You have contributed to the salinity.  But your influence is beyond insignificant.  We are the same re the troposphere.

Since there is no money in saying hogwash to Antroprogenic global warming and since the anthroprogenic global warming advocates are so militant I admire this man who told the (Unpopular) truth. 

YES:  There is global warming (Climate Change) going on. 

NO: Man didn’t cause it and can’t cure it. 

It is the height of egocentrism to believe we have enough capacity to influence the weather on the whole globe.

If you want something to worry about, worry about this.  You could be wiped out tommorrow by gamma rays coming at you at the speed of light and there is no escape and there would be no warning.  Life on earth would just end in the fraction of a second.  It could happen today.

Here’s the origional article, you have to scroll down a long way to find it.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Or not.

[b]Old Tigers are more dangerous when they believe this could be their last hunt.

From , “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”
Old tigers, sensing the end,
they’re at their most fierce. 
And they go down fighting.

Panya:

Because everyone does it, everyone should always do it? That’s a superb argument for the status quo.

You missed it.  This is a free country, which means we get to choose what we buy and don’t buy, what we manufacture and don’t manufacture.  You and your enviro extremist cronies are welcome to voice your opinions, but you don’t get to force your values on us through legislation or the courts.  Get it?  We don’t agree with you that we are doing the wrong thing.  As a matter of fact, we think we are doing the right thing.  Human-caused Global Warming is a hypothesis.  Look that up in the dictionary, and you might understand what is really going on here.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Those of you who missed this thread on Kos, don’t understand how things work. See, facts alone don’t mean anything to the left because they KNOW what the truth is. In fact, according to some of the commenters, the lack of facts is proof of something in and of itself. The lone voice f sanity in that discussion kept repeating, “Since we are the reality-based community, we need to have proof of the things we allege. Just because we believe something is true doesn’t mean it is.” OF course, he was attacked for being sane.

funny commment.

I actually thing the reason gas prices when up was because of a perfect storm: new arbritary government regulation kicking in a great amount of voluptivity caused by uncertainty in a key oil producing region, disruptions in some key supplying areas, and a substantial decrease refining capacity (caused by the new formula which was dictated by the arbritary govenrment regulation)

..arbritary govenrment regulation, California should take a hint.

aNON: Name any govt regulation that isn’t arbitrary.
The sudden imposition of the ethanol mandate(after decades of using the “demon” MTBE) added around 50 cents a gallon to the price of gas, which was not reported widely in the media, since they wanted to use the runup to “Get the President” by accusing him of conspiring to raise gas prices to enrich his “oil buddies”.  Now they are doing it on the down side, by accusing him of conspiring to lower gas prices to aid Republicans.  The MSM has no shame.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Now they are doing it on the down side, by accusing him of conspiring to lower gas prices to aid Republicans. The MSM has no shame.

I’VE actually seen them do the opposite: make satire out of those believing Bush did it, caused the prices to go down.

Perhaps California could merely require that car owners put a plug in their exhaust pipe. That will fix the emissions problem.

Rice-A-Roni, the San Fransicko treat!

Ding Ding!

aNON:

I’VE actually seen them do the opposite: make satire out of those believing Bush did it, caused the prices to go down.

I can’t dispute that you might have seen one newscast of that nature, but it isn’t the overall tone of the MSM on the subject, to be sure.  In any case, those that believe the President has anything to do with gas prices are in need of professional help.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

dd:

Following the motions and discovery on this case should prove interesting as California being the plaintiff must show proof of its claims and since there is nebulous proof of global warming at best, well… this case may never make it to trial.

If it hadn’t been for the McDonald’s hot coffee damage award, I might be more hopeful, but I don’t trust the courts anymore, especially in the area of awarding damages for imaginary slights.
Silicone breast implants come to mind, for a number of reasons… They ruined a company and an entire industry, then admitted it was junk science.  Oh well.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

aNON: Here’s a link for you on the subject:

http://newsbusters.org/node/7785

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Why do you focus on the opinions of a discredited scientist like Gray instead of accepting the consensus view of the scientific community?

Even Steven Verdon, the author you cite above, admits:

The consensus view is just the opposite, that there was no little ice age and that the cause for the increase in global temperatures is human activities.

Roger Pielke Jr., director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said in an interview later Monday that climate scientists involved with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that most of the warming is due to human activity.

And even Fox News has reached the point where they have to report human-induced global warming as a settled issue.

Will, you doofus, that’s an AP article being run on the Fox News site.

Not that it matters.  For the faithful followers of the cult of global warming facts just don’t matter.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob: You’re splitting hairs, but I’ll issue a correction, if it will get you to drop the snarky name-calling and read the articles.

Why do you focus on the opinions of a discredited scientist like Gray instead of accepting the consensus view of the scientific community?

Even Steven Verdon, the author you cite above, admits:

The consensus view is just the opposite, that there was no little ice age and that the cause for the increase in global temperatures is human activities.
Roger Pielke Jr., director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said in an interview later Monday that climate scientists involved with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that most of the warming is due to human activity.

And even Fox News has reached the point where they run a story reporting human-induced global warming as a settled issue.

Will said, Why do you focus on the opinions of a discredited scientist like Gray instead of accepting the consensus view of the scientific community?

The sun revolves around the flat earth.

What...you don’t accept that? It used to be consensus.

And thus ends the lesson of the appeal to authority argument.

And even Fox News has reached the point where they run a story reporting human-induced global warming as a settled issue.

They’re running an AP article.

Wasn’t that already said?

Yes, it was just an AP article.  It should at least be noted that within the article, it was a Republican Congressman who requested and supported the findings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Personally, I think California is taking the wrong approach towards reducing CO2 emmissions. Why make this an adversarial process? Hopefully today’s announcement by Richard Bransonwill illustrate that there can be a cooperative effort between environmentalists and the transportation industry.

likwidshoe:

The sun revolves around the flat earth.

What...you don’t accept that? It used to be consensus.

That was more philosophic dogma than scientific consensus.  Science as we know it barely existed back then.  Galileo, one of the first true scientists in history, was put to death by the church for using science to disprove that myth.

And that’s your argument against global warming?  The fact that scientists were right more than 300 years ago about the earth revolving around the sun?

Please read this and this if you have any honest interest in learning about global warming.

Will,

It used to be, during the 80’s, that another ice age was coming.  I remember the maps on the news showing the ice coming down through Canada and overtaking the US.  They were wrong and so are you. 10 years from now we’ll all be laughing at the lunacy of the global warming threat to the planet whatsoever.

Will:

And that’s your argument against global warming?

It’s not necessary to have any argument against the human-caused global warming hypothesis.  You use a very common propaganda trick there.
It is up to you environmental extremists to prove it.  Nice try.

What’s the proven cause and effect relationship between CO2 and global mean temp?  Can you quantify it?  How much does global mean temp increase for every 0.1% increase in atmospheric CO2?  If you can’t answer that question, you have nothing, except the fairy tales you are trying to sell.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

robert108-

I don’t agree that strict quantification is necessary to validate the reduction of greenhouse gasses.  The environment is dynamic, and so there won’t be direct effects that would make these decisions so much easier.

I see environmental health the same way we see our own body’s health.  I think everyone can agree that diet and exercise contribute to better health.  Yet you can’t say, if you eat 5 oranges a day, you are guaranteed to add three years to your life.  Similarly, while we can’t quantify it, it’s reasonable to suggest that reducing emissions will be better for the environment.

By that same token, while I’m not willing to give up red meat and eat tofu and beans for the rest of my life, I’m not advocating that we give up all cars and start riding bicycles everywhere we go.  However, I do think that it is good public policy for environmentalists and transportation companies (see previous comment) to work cooperatively towards improving the efficiency and emmissions of vehicles.

dbruin:

Similarly, while we can’t quantify it, it’s reasonable to suggest that reducing emissions will be better for the environment.

Your assertion assumes an equivalency between the Earth’s atmosphere and the human body which is not proven to exist.
The problem I have with the “human-caused global warming” mythology is not only that it is junk science, but that it is designed to destroy modern industrial civilization, which is the real agenda of the environmental extremists.
They are certainly welcome to their opinions, but when they start messing with my life through their socialist supply-limiting policies, I draw the line.
I also say that quantification is necessary to justify any of their “reforms”.  You create a straw man with your adding “strict”; something I never said.  Accurate quantification would be essential, IMO.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

It used to be, during the 80’s, that another ice age was coming.

I don’t recall that.  Can you cite something comparable to this to back up your claim?

Robert108:

The problem I have with the “human-caused global warming” mythology is not only that it is junk science, but that it is designed to destroy modern industrial civilization, which is the real agenda of the environmental extremists.

Ok, time to take that tinfoil hat off your head.  Can you cite something Can you cite something comparable to this to back up your “junk science” claim?

The National Academy of Sciences, reaching that conclusion in a broad review of scientific work requested by Congress, reported Thursday that the “recent warmth is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia.”

A panel of top climate scientists told lawmakers that the Earth is heating up and that “human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming.”

.
.
.

The report was requested in November by the chairman of the House Science Committee, Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., to address naysayers who question whether global warming is a major threat.

Will: Still no proven and quantifiable cause and effect relationships between human activity and global warming.  That’s why it’s still regarded as a hypothesis by real scientists.
Since we are coming out of an ice age, the Earth is still warming up, but it has nothing whatever to do with humans.  Duh.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

R108:

It used to be, during the 80’s, that another ice age was coming.

Will:

I don’t recall that

If you don’t know that you have no base of knowledge to be discussing the Global Warming issue.

TW: Actually, it was the Seventies, but who’s counting?  It was the cover of either Time or Newsweek in ‘74, as I remember.  Details and facts are unimportant to the True Believers, though.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

http://www.john-daly.com/schneidr.htm

You’re welcome Will.

Excellent, thank you.  Now please read this:

Every now and again, the myth that “we shouldn’t believe global warming predictions now, because in the 1970’s they were predicting an ice age and/or cooling” surfaces. Recently, George Will mentioned it in his column (see Will-full ignorance) and the egregious Crichton manages to say “in the 1970’s all the climate scientists believed an ice age was coming” (see Michael Crichton’s State of Confusion ). You can find it in various other places too [here, mildly here, etc]. But its not an argument used by respectable and knowledgeable skeptics, because it crumbles under analysis. That doesn’t stop it repeatedly cropping up in newsgroups though.

There’s your junk science.

Will: So, they’re both junk science.  Some of us have known this for a long time.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Will: One problem for you might be that Carl Sagan was a very firm proponent of “Global Cooling”, along with the assertion that it was exacerbated by human-caused air pollution.  I read a report wherein he asserted that CO2 influence was a non-factor in global temp.  Just thought you would like to know.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

There’s your junk science.

Will,

I see you’re passionate about this issue.  I regret that in a few years you will regret your misplaced passion.  Global warming is no threat to this or any other planet.  Science is no God.
It has been wrong before, as I pointed out, and it will be wrong again and is wrong about global warming.

Way to go will, here you are an expert and you didn’t even understand the history of the climate change movement.

What a double standard.  Arnold in the Hummer (choke, cough, sputter) suing the more fuel-efficient, small car manufacturers.

Sely: CA is mostly run by Dems, and they are responsible for this silly lawsuit, not the Gov.  Get a grip.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

You all amaze me.  Why should anyone care about what Carl Sagan thought years ago?  Or what was on the cover of Newsweek decades ago?  Or whether John Daly thinks Stephen Schneider is a sensationalist?  All of that is just noise.

What matters is that CO2 is at levels not seen in at least 160,000 years, the levels are increasing an unprecedented pace, and CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

What matters is that scientists have been evaluating the global warming hypothesis for decades.  They have been collecting data and examining the evidence both for and against global warming for decades.  The end result is a broad scientific concensus is that global warming is a serious threat to the planet.

And yet you all seem to think that global warming is impossible.