Comments on: 3 States Stay in Northeast Cap & Trade Program (for Obvious Reasons) Despite Huge Republican/Tea Party Attack

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 08:07:00 +0000

Wow, here’s a nonsense reply to respond to. First of all, i don’t really
appreciate this ridiculous generalization: “You’re simply buying into the
old liberal fallacy that all government spending has a positive economic
impact in excess of the cost of appropriating those funds from the public.”

Secondly, whether you like to admit it or not, the clear economic benefits
are not anything a sane person can argue with. Even without any complicated
analysis, this isn’t hard to realize. Putting money into energy efficiency
and renewable energy instead of old coal (especially from out-of-state
companies), more person-intensive fields for more middle and working class
people, goes a lot further and creates a lot more economic growth. Giving
that same money to coal company billionaires is not the same.

By: Hroark314

Hroark314 — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 15:37:00 +0000

RGGI does not increase state gross product. I’m sure that you’ve turned up a study by some economist who was paid to claim that the program has benefits, but the reality is that the marginal benefit of the reduced CO2 emissions approaches $0 and there are real costs to the economy associated with inefficiently choosing to use more expensive electricity than necessary. You’re simply buying into the old liberal fallacy that all government spending has a positive economic impact in excess of the cost of appropriating those funds from the public. Your allegation that RGGI creates $2.6 billion of additional economic output could just as easily be applied to any and all government spending and, in spite of what the Keynesians in Washington would have us believe, increasing government spending as a percent of GDP is inversely correlated with GDP per capita. That’s just the way that it is.

By: New Jersey Pulling Out of RGGI? Not Yet (& Clear Reasons Why It Shouldn’t) – CleanTechnica: Cleantech innovation news and views

Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:47:40 +0000

[…] politicians. That’s my 2 cents. Spread the word!More RGGI articles on CleanTechnica:3 States Stay in Northeast Cap & Trade Program (for Obvious Reasons) Despite Huge Republican/Tea…Massachusetts Joins California and New Mexico to Cut GHGs 25% Below 1990 by 2020Northeast Cap & […]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 27 May 2011 08:36:00 +0000

hmm, formatting got screwed up, again here (hopefully better):

http://planetsave.com/2011/02/…

http://planetsave.com/2010/05/…

http://planetsave.com/2011/05/…

furthermore, with about 97-98% of climate scientists telling us the same thing (hundreds or thousands of them), can you really assume this conspiracy theory you propose? have you ever known any climate scientists? i have.

if 97% of heart doctors in the world told you that you had a critical heart problem and gave you advice on how to solve it, would you assume it was a huge conspiracy to steal your money and make you poor? so, why do you assume the same percentage climate scientists, coming to a clear conclusion after decades of intense research and advising that we cut our carbon emissions (i.e. stop overusing coal and oil), are wrong?

anyway, here are the scientific bodies that i referred to above:

links available here: http://www.skepticalscience.co…

The following scientific organizations endorse the consensus position that “most of the global warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities”:

American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO
British Antarctic Survey
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Environmental Protection Agency
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
Federation of American Scientists
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA)
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Royal Meteorological Society
Royal Society of the UK
The Academies of Science from 19 different countries all endorse the consensus. 11 countries have signed a joint statement endorsing the consensus position:

Academia Brasiliera de Ciencias (Brazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academie des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (USA) (12 Mar 2009 news release)
A letter from 18 scientific organizations to US Congress states:

“Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver. These conclusions are based on multiple independent lines of evidence, and contrary assertions are inconsistent with an objective assessment of the vast body of peer-reviewed science.”
The consensus is also endorsed by a Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC), including the following bodies:

African Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Madagascar’s National Academy of Arts, Letters and Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
l’Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Academy of Science of South Africa
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Sudan Academy of Sciences

Two other Academies of Sciences that endorse the consensus:

Royal Society of New Zealand
Polish Academy of Sciences
A survey of peer-reviewed research

Scientists need to back up their opinions with research and data that survive the peer-review process. A survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject ‘global climate change’ published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused (Oreskes 2004). 75% of the papers agreed with the consensus position while 25% made no comment either way (focused on methods or paleoclimate analysis). More on Naomi Oreskes’ survey…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 27 May 2011 08:33:00 +0000

yeah, it means you’ve been completely confused by their front groups’ and politicians’ propaganda. on climate change, yes, we and nearly every major overarching scientific organization have been mislead by the magicians of climate science. “get a clue?” try learning about the science of important topics before you make important decisions or statements on them.

here’s more on climate science (and i encourage you to explore the links in the post above for more on RGGI):

By: Heres_a_clue

Heres_a_clue — Thu, 26 May 2011 12:30:00 +0000

Thanks for the heads-up. I live in NJ and just signed the Tea Party petition repudiating RGGI. Ofcourse I guess that means I’ve somehow been bought by the Koch Brothers. You loons need to get a clue and realize how manipulated you are by environmental extremists’ fear mongering, lies and exagerations on climate change.

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Wed, 25 May 2011 09:25:59 +0000

Thank You, Jan. I think I’ve run across it. But thanks for informing me (and others)!

By: Jan Williams

Jan Williams — Wed, 25 May 2011 06:51:00 +0000

Mr. Shahan: Since you bring up Koch Industries, here’s another interesting group they participate in : ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council.) Let your fingers do the walking. (Just in case , you didn’t know about them already.)
I thank you for keeping responsible citizens informed. Love the site!