I Have A Feeling We’re Still In Kansas

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
*

61 Replies to “I Have A Feeling We’re Still In Kansas”

I think we also have to realize, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KYOTO AND THE EARTH’S CHANGING CLIMATR.
There is a difference bettween CARBON CREDITS AND POLUTION.
Also, why not, in any event, use hydrocarbons wisely ? It is expensive and bad for the environment to waste this resourse. About the only negative, in conservation, might be for the Millions of Canadians who have energy stocks in our PENSION FUND, ha. And that includes almost all of us !!

Actually there is a big negative in conservation. You don’t use it, some other guy gets to it first. Even if you don’t lose it outright, your economy grows slower than the neighbours’, and their power and influence eclipses yours. You might come out of it better off in the long run – or you might not. No easy solutions (unless you’re willing to retreat to the woods and let the tides of nations pass you by), but it sure needs talking about.

Suuuure…Katrina victims you ignore it too mainly because scientific world class authorities speaking out, educating are, as a friend of mine put, a “big pile of no fun.”
Here’s a message for moniker, DICK RAMBONE, lifting and signing over my posts. Anyone here personally know this guy, anyone, anyone? Assuming it’s a ‘pornographic’ reference meant to ‘annoy’, ‘perturb’ moi –you’re barking up the wrong tree –and oh yes, “let no man deceive you” is my best advice to you.
Dick Rambone: Wish I could say nice to meet you. No I’m saying it. Take good care of yourself.

Canadian(n)a – what the hell are you talking about?
That’s two comments from you now, and neither have any relationship to what’s been written here.
Some advice for you – don’t direct comments to what I’ve written or not written until you’ve done your homework. This blog has recorded over 4,000 posts. They’re archived. Search them.
Until you’ve done that, refrain from posting further.

Laura: “Actually there is a big negative in conservation. You don’t use it, some other guy gets to it first”
I have to take issue with that. Consider the miniscule effect of my bike riding (half hour a day, 6 days a week, about 10 km each time). That’s only 60 km a week, or about 6 litres of gas. But, over a year, that’s 300 litres of gas. That’s $300 in my pocket. ($250 is more accurate; I don’t ride the bike as much in winter but I still do ride it.) Get 10% of Canadians to join me (a tall order, I’ll admit), and we save close to $750 million. Now, since Canada is a net exporter of oil, that’s $750 million of oil freed up to sell to them furriners, plus we get to spend that $750 million on other stuff. And, we’re just a little bit healthier, so we might reduce health care costs by not having heart attacks, obesity problems, etc.
Plus, we don’t pollute our environment as much, so we don’t have as many smog days, other people don’t have as many breathing problems, etc. There are a lot of positive knock-on effects, and given the lousy state of traffic in Richmond Hill, it’s almost as fast to ride the bike as it is to drive!
This is just one example of how a small-c conservation life style (as opposed to grand schemes like Kyoto) can have many positive benefits with virtually no costs. Now if someone were to start telling me to close all the coal-fired power plants in Ontario and import expensive power from somewhere else so China can build more (and dirtier) plants, I’m going to have a problem.

I think that there is more agreement between my position and those of Laura and Kevin than may upon first examination appear to be the case, given my rhetorical shtick. Perhaps I can summarize my position this way. If the precautionary principle is to be applied to things, then the precautionary principle should be applied to the precautionary principle too.

Laura, thanks for your input. I think we have talked a little about this before. Also…
It’s good to question the “science” being cited by some folks who try to alarm society about global warming. Sure, many “scientists” vehemently claim that it’s absolutely proven, but, like I said above, just thinking about the history of climate change before man and today makes one question the whole thing. It’s conceivable someone might’ve goofed somehow, which would mean the whole “proof” in which so many “scientists” believe would have to be scrapped and a new inquiry devised as to the causes of global warming. Surely it cannot be simple.
I just hope the “scientists” aren’t messing around or something. No one’s immune to corruption. No one at all. Could some folks be seeing dollar signs in falsifying proofs wrt climate change? One never knows for sure, so it’s good to ask these questions. Getting into science mostly for personal financial enrichment is, to me, potentially unethical. It’d be wrong to perpetuate a big lie to the world so one could make big bucks…

As Rex Murphy wrote, in “Selling something, Dr. Suzuki?’, in the Globe and Mail on 2002-09-28: “Ratifying the Koyoto Protocol is a real debate, has real costs, is a mix of guesses, best estimates and conflicting claims, with real consequences whichever way it’s decided. For the sake of the debate, let’s lay off the science unless it is science.”

Isn’t it just AMAZING how, 4 YEARS AGO, REX MURPHY was/is so RIGHT and Dr. Jacuzzi was/is so WRONG. The fact that the MSM did not/HAS NOT yet picked up on that/this is, I think, worthy of an inquiry. Perhaps someone, someday, will write a book, movie, on the HOAX OF THE CENTURY.
— AN INCONVIENIENT HOAX staring .. —

Call for the sticky shift-key repair team, customer-service courtesy telephone please.
Or as we used to say back in the UseNet days, typing harder doesn’t make you more correct.

This is whay we’re 10 years behind Europe.

61 Replies to “I Have A Feeling We’re Still In Kansas”

Navigation