myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Global cooling
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 202, 203, 204 ... 347, 348, 349  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1810
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
The bleating from NW has been heard, like chicken little's, since the beginning.

There you go again with the personal slander, I'm going to continue to repost your personal crap as long as you fling it in my direction, just so everyone can see that you are weakening your sides argument by flinging this personal crap. It's worthless and weakens your place in this,,,,,,,,,,, what's left of it.
Why don't you go windsurfing for a change, it might be good for you.

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5895

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NW30, you and I are fairly close in age, so I thought you might remember back to the mid 60s and help me make my point. You know, I can't remember cars having catalytic converters when I was in high school. It was only after auto emissions regulations were enacted a number of years later that cars starting incorporating catalytic converters as part of their emissions control systems.

Catalytic converters didn't just magically appear out of nowhere. The concept was designed, developed and manufactured to meet a need. To do this, jobs were created at many different levels, and they really haven't gone away. And, that's just one component assembly in modern auto emission systems today. None of this would have happened if stricter auto emissions regulations weren't introduced.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1960

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac. My issue is not with the need to enact regulations to reduce pollution or greenhouse gases. It is with regulatory agencies developing these regulations without legislative direction. The ACA is a sterling example right now. The bureaucrats are working overtime to f&&k things up without benefit of political guidance and oversight.

The Repub party's mantra "NO", is not cutting it. The Demo party's methodology of using back room lawyering will not work either.

Consensus is needed to develop a politically sustainable carbon reduction strategy as both Colorado and Calif. have. BTW, the surest way to derail a cause in Colo is to say "this is how they do it in CA". Good thing we did it first!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5374

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NW--as long as you post nonsense about the damage done to coal by regulation, and don't respond to posts that correct your basic misunderstanding of either the health impacts or the market, you are "bleating" about how the sky will fall. I have heard such bleating, about how the adoption of emission controls for autos, will destroy the economy, for more than thirty years. You are wrong now, just as your predecessors were wrong then. Returning to talking points without engaging the facts is "bleating." Ignoring the health impacts and costs of emissions just points out your bias. Participate in the conversation if you want to be treated with respect.

CB--the framework for Obama's regulations is the Clean Air Act and the Supreme Court decision I cited. There can be no higher authority than that, despite its limitations in the options available to Obama. The Clean Air Act that authorizes Obama's regulations was passed by a very large bi-partisan majority, and the wing nuts in the Tea Party don't have the votes to change it--it is the law of the land.

California is the most populous state, and has led the economic recovery of jobs. The higher tax rate than Texas for personal income has not prevented that. Perhaps it is the comparative mental health of the governor's of the two states? In any event, the climate policy program for California was developed by a moderate Republican governor working with the legislator, and has broken much of the essential policy ground.

Mac
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1810
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
NW--as long as you post nonsense about the damage done to coal by regulation, and don't respond to posts that correct your basic misunderstanding of either the health impacts or the market, you are "bleating" about how the sky will fall. I have heard such bleating, about how the adoption of emission controls for autos, will destroy the economy, for more than thirty years. You are wrong now, just as your predecessors were wrong then. Returning to talking points without engaging the facts is "bleating." Ignoring the health impacts and costs of emissions just points out your bias. Participate in the conversation if you want to be treated with respect.


Mac


Now I get it, agree with me, and my bias, or you get no respect, and I will continue to use name calling and derogatory terms, as I see fit.
Nice skill you have there, where did you learn it?

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.


Last edited by nw30 on Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:28 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14322

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
The Repub party's mantra "NO", is not cutting it

At least it forces Obama to reveal his dishonesty by end-running the Congressional checks and balance system. Without the "Party of No" we'd be under the direct rule of King Obama ... as he has stated several times in several ways to several audiences.

Example: The Congress denied his carbon tax, so he's using the EPA to sidestep it. The news.

Example: If it weren't for Fox News and Limbaugh, I could [fool all the people all the time]. The New Repiblic

Example: Tell Vladimir "After my next election I'll have more flexibility " to Medvedev. Open mic slip.

Beats the hell out of the Party of FU, which is why we elected them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1810
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler wrote:
NW30, you and I are fairly close in age, so I thought you might remember back to the mid 60s and help me make my point. You know, I can't remember cars having catalytic converters when I was in high school. It was only after auto emissions regulations were enacted a number of years later that cars starting incorporating catalytic converters as part of their emissions control systems.

Catalytic converters didn't just magically appear out of nowhere. The concept was designed, developed and manufactured to meet a need. To do this, jobs were created at many different levels, and they really haven't gone away. And, that's just one component assembly in modern auto emission systems today. None of this would have happened if stricter auto emissions regulations weren't introduced.


Yes we are about the same age, and I also remember what the reasoning was behind the catalytic converters for cars was, and it wasn't anything about global warming, it was about pollution control. I didn't have a problem with CC being put on cars, and still don't, and I'm all in favor with pollution control, recycling, and litter control.
I just don't combine those worthy efforts with trying to control the weather or..................... saving the planet.
This planet will still be here long after we've all been wiped out due to some crazy thermo-nuclear religious war. Bigger chance of that happening, before we all fry due to global warming.

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3464

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well spoke NW.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2708

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
...I also remember what the reasoning was behind the catalytic converters for cars was, and it wasn't anything about global warming, it was about pollution control.

What do you think causes global warming?
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5895

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NW30, I think if you go back over time, you'll find that I haven't been an off-the-top advocate or denier for the global warming issue in the same vein as some here. However, I do view pollution and emissions control to be a very serious issue. The cleaner we make things that we do the better, whether that involves auto, energy production, farming and manufacturing emissions and contamination or any other byproduct of our efforts.

When you think about it, the Obama Administration is on our side in this effort, and they have moved in a responsible way to bend things in the right direction. If the Republicans were smart they would get on board and help initiate and direct steps to encourage a cleaner and healthier America. Just as the government has provided the leadership and support over the years to build the finest military in the world, they can also provide the same kind of role in cleaning up our act in other important areas. At the core of things are improved standards and regulations that are needed to provide the necessary vision and direction to get things off the ground. Moreover, the government can help fund new technologies to meet these new standards and their related challenges. One has to remember that this isn't about nationalizing industries or simply taking things over, it's about the government providing the leadership and stimulus to accomplish things that private industry couldn't or wouldn't accomplish otherwise.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 202, 203, 204 ... 347, 348, 349  Next
Page 203 of 349

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group