From the people who believe astrology is "science":
MOTHER JONES: STUDY SHOWS GLOBAL WARMING MAY CAUSE MORE RAPE
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/02/27/Mother-Jones-Global-Warming-Will-Cause-More-Rape
face)(*^%
MOTHER JONES: STUDY SHOWS GLOBAL WARMING MAY CAUSE MORE RAPE
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/02/27/Mother-Jones-Global-Warming-Will-Cause-More-Rape
face)(*^%
Democrats plan all-night 'talkathon' on climate change
A majority of Senate Democrats on Monday will launch an overnight "talkathon" until approximately 9:00 a.m. Tuesday to draw attention to climate change.
The overnight effort, organized by Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, is part of the recently launched Senate Climate Action Task Force headed by Sens. Barbara Boxer of California and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.
In a statement, Boxer said Democrats want to "wake up Congress" to the dangers of climate change.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...e-democrats-talkathon-climate-change/6172647/
:Carcajada:
A majority of Senate Democrats on Monday will launch an overnight "talkathon" until approximately 9:00 a.m. Tuesday to draw attention to climate change.
The overnight effort, organized by Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, is part of the recently launched Senate Climate Action Task Force headed by Sens. Barbara Boxer of California and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.
In a statement, Boxer said Democrats want to "wake up Congress" to the dangers of climate change.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...e-democrats-talkathon-climate-change/6172647/
:Carcajada:
My, my, my. How incredibly genius of them. For all the uninformed out there who were wondering what all the fuss was about Benghazi, the IRS, NSA, Ukraine and Russia and let us not forget about Iran which has been pretty much put on the shelf, they can now put it out of their minds and concentrate on the most pressing issue of their time, GLOBAL WARMING!
Oops, did I say GLOBAL WARMING? What was I thinking? I meant to say Climate Change or was it Pocket Change? I can never get it straight.
Forget about the economy, the debt (now at 17 trillion), 15% of the general public receiving food stamps, employment participation at it’s lowest rate in 30 years and last but not least, that colossal clusterfuck we affectionately call ObamaCare.
Mid terms are coming, time to change the menu.
[ Look at this ignorant douche fuck ]
[h=1]Kerry makes climate change a 'top-tier diplomatic priority’[/h] Published March 12, 2014FoxNews.com
Facebook31 Twitter108 Gplus0
FILE: Aug. 12, 2013: Secretary of State John Kerry in Bogota, Columbia.AP
Secretary of State John Kerry, deeming climate change a “top-tier diplomatic priority,” has decided to make the controversial topic the subject of his first policy initiative and is instructing U.S. emissaries worldwide to push the agenda.
“Protecting our environment and meeting the challenge of global climate change is a critical mission for me as our country's top diplomat,” Kerry wrote in his Policy Guidance, which was released Friday and marked his first since becoming secretary in February 2013.
“It's also a critical mission for all of you: our brave men and women on the front lines of direct diplomacy,” he said.
[h=1]Kerry makes climate change a 'top-tier diplomatic priority’[/h] Published March 12, 2014FoxNews.com
Facebook31 Twitter108 Gplus0
FILE: Aug. 12, 2013: Secretary of State John Kerry in Bogota, Columbia.APSecretary of State John Kerry, deeming climate change a “top-tier diplomatic priority,” has decided to make the controversial topic the subject of his first policy initiative and is instructing U.S. emissaries worldwide to push the agenda.
“Protecting our environment and meeting the challenge of global climate change is a critical mission for me as our country's top diplomat,” Kerry wrote in his Policy Guidance, which was released Friday and marked his first since becoming secretary in February 2013.
“It's also a critical mission for all of you: our brave men and women on the front lines of direct diplomacy,” he said.
[ And the ignorant sheeple keep getting conned by the likes of John Kerry and Al Gore, and Barack Obama ]
[h=1]Last Six Months Coldest Since 1912[/h]
163
2
607
2
Email Article Print article Send a Tip
by Warner Todd Huston 12 Mar 2014 1268 post a comment
[h=2]As things stand today, the U.S. has experienced the coldest six-month stretch since 1912 and if the country has a few more days with low temperatures, it may yet break that record.[/h] Thus far, 77 percent of the country has been below normal temperatures since October 1. And the October thru March temperatures have been their coldest sine 1899.
On just one day in January, 49 record lows were set across the nation thanks to weather patterns pushed south by the polar vortex.
It will be months before the wide spread icepack on the Great Lakes melts, as well. Thus far this Winter the lakes are 88 percent iced over, far and above the average of 50 percent iced.
[h=1]Last Six Months Coldest Since 1912[/h]
163
2
607
2
Email Article Print article Send a Tip
by Warner Todd Huston 12 Mar 2014 1268 post a comment
On just one day in January, 49 record lows were set across the nation thanks to weather patterns pushed south by the polar vortex.
It will be months before the wide spread icepack on the Great Lakes melts, as well. Thus far this Winter the lakes are 88 percent iced over, far and above the average of 50 percent iced.
[ And the ignorant sheeple keep getting conned by the likes of John Kerry and Al Gore, and Barack Obama ]
Last Six Months Coldest Since 1912
163
2
607
2
Email Article Print article Send a Tip
by Warner Todd Huston 12 Mar 2014 1268 post a comment
As things stand today, the U.S. has experienced the coldest six-month stretch since 1912 and if the country has a few more days with low temperatures, it may yet break that record.
Thus far, 77 percent of the country has been below normal temperatures since October 1. And the October thru March temperatures have been their coldest sine 1899.
On just one day in January, 49 record lows were set across the nation thanks to weather patterns pushed south by the polar vortex.
It will be months before the wide spread icepack on the Great Lakes melts, as well. Thus far this Winter the lakes are 88 percent iced over, far and above the average of 50 percent iced.
My somewhat belief of climate change has nothing to do with politicians. I personally know scientists who study this shit, but I am a skeptic
Dennis Miller rips a new asshole for these Democrat global warming scammers.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/03/14/Dennis-Miller-on-Barbara-Boxers-Global-Warming-Activism-She-is-an-idiot-She-is-bat-guano-crazy
[h=1]Dennis Miller on Barbara Boxer's Global Warming Activism: 'She Is an Idiot. She Is Bat Guano Crazy'[/h] Back to Breitbart TV
Share This: 50 57
Print Email
on Breitbart TV 13 Mar 2014 137 post a comment
On Thursday’s “The O’Reilly Factor” on the Fox News Channel, comedian Dennis Miller ranted against the lawmakers that participated in the so-called “Up4Climate” talk-a-thon that took place on the floor of the U.S. Senate earlier this week to draw attention to global warming.
The primary focus of Miller’s ire was Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who Miller argued her participation was reason enough not to believe global warming is a serious issue.
“[T]hose four people are idiots,” Miller said. “Our leaders are idiots. I admire the other three for risking waking up to see what Barbara Boxer looks like in the morning. But simply, her secret service name is ‘polar vortex,’ alright? She is an idiot. She is bat guano crazy. She sleeps upside-down. If she thinks there is global warming that is enough of a reason for me to not think there is global warming because she and the other three: massive idiots. We should be ashamed of ourselves for the leaders we pick in this world.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/03/14/Dennis-Miller-on-Barbara-Boxers-Global-Warming-Activism-She-is-an-idiot-She-is-bat-guano-crazy
[h=1]Dennis Miller on Barbara Boxer's Global Warming Activism: 'She Is an Idiot. She Is Bat Guano Crazy'[/h] Back to Breitbart TV
Share This: 50 57
Print Email
on Breitbart TV 13 Mar 2014 137 post a comment
On Thursday’s “The O’Reilly Factor” on the Fox News Channel, comedian Dennis Miller ranted against the lawmakers that participated in the so-called “Up4Climate” talk-a-thon that took place on the floor of the U.S. Senate earlier this week to draw attention to global warming.
The primary focus of Miller’s ire was Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who Miller argued her participation was reason enough not to believe global warming is a serious issue.
“[T]hose four people are idiots,” Miller said. “Our leaders are idiots. I admire the other three for risking waking up to see what Barbara Boxer looks like in the morning. But simply, her secret service name is ‘polar vortex,’ alright? She is an idiot. She is bat guano crazy. She sleeps upside-down. If she thinks there is global warming that is enough of a reason for me to not think there is global warming because she and the other three: massive idiots. We should be ashamed of ourselves for the leaders we pick in this world.”
AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY SEES THE LIGHT: WILL IT BE THE FIRST MAJOR SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTION TO REJECT THE GLOBAL WARMING 'CONSENSUS'?
Email ArticlePrint articleSend a Tip
by JAMES DELINGPOLE 20 Mar 2014 2060POST A COMMENT
The American Physical Society (APS) has signalled a dramatic turnabout in its position on "climate change" by appointing three notorious climate skeptics to its panel on public affairs (POPA).
They are:
Professor Richard Lindzen, formerly Alfred P Sloan Professor of Meteorology at Massachussetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a highly regarded physicist who once described climate change alarmism on The Larry King Show as "mainly just like little kids locking themselves in dark closets to see how much they can scare each other and themselves."
John Christy, Professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, who has written: "I'm sure the majority (but not all) of my IPCC colleagues cringe when I say this, but I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see."
Judith Curry, Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, a former Warmist (and still a self-described "luke warmer") who has infuriated many of her more extremist colleagues by defending skeptics and by testifying to the US House Subcommittee on the Environment that the uncertainties in forecasting climate science are much greater than the alarmists will admit.
As Anthony Watts has noted, this is news guaranteed to make a Warmist's head explode.
The reason it's so significant is that it comes only three years after one of the APS's most distinguished members - Professor Hal Lewis - resigned in disgust at its endorsement of what he called "the global warming scam."
Disturbed by an "appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change" which "was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members", Lewis went public with his letter of resignation to the APS's then President Curtis G Callan Jr. (Callan's replacement Malcolm Beasley appears to be of a more skeptical bent. When he wrote earlier this year to President Obama congratulating him on his support for "science", he studiously avoided any mention of the president's war on climate change)
It began:
Lewis went on to describe global warming as "the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist."
Yet when Lewis had gathered two hundred plus signatures from fellow members to protest against the APS's position, they found - "Constitution be damned" - that the Council simply refused to accept their petition.
He concluded:
It is inconceivable, given the new panel's constitution, that when the APS releases its new position statement on climate change later this year it will be anything other than broadly skeptical of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.
This will mark a major victory for climate skeptics. Up until now, one of the most effective weapons in the climate alarmists' armoury has been to declare that all the world's major scientific institutions subscribe to the Man-Made Global Warming "Consensus."
These include: Academia Brasiliera de Ciencas; Academia Mexicana de Ciencas; Academie des Sciences (France); Academy of Science of South Africa; Accademia dei Lincei (Italy); American Association for the Advancement of Science; American Astronomical Society; American Chemical Society; American Geophysical Union; American Institute of Physics; American Meteorological Society; Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society; British Antarctic Survey; Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences; Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society; Chinese Academy of Sciences; Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany); 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; Geological Society of London; Indian National Science Academy; International Union for Quaternary Research; International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics; National Academy of Sciences; National Center for Atmospheric Research; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Royal Meteorological Society; Royal Society of Canada; Royal Society; Science Council of Japan.
If that list looks impressive, perhaps it's worth reminding ourselves of Hal Lewis's theory as to why so many scientific institutions have fallen for the scam.
Email ArticlePrint articleSend a Tip
by JAMES DELINGPOLE 20 Mar 2014 2060POST A COMMENT
They are:
Professor Richard Lindzen, formerly Alfred P Sloan Professor of Meteorology at Massachussetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a highly regarded physicist who once described climate change alarmism on The Larry King Show as "mainly just like little kids locking themselves in dark closets to see how much they can scare each other and themselves."
John Christy, Professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, who has written: "I'm sure the majority (but not all) of my IPCC colleagues cringe when I say this, but I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see."
Judith Curry, Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, a former Warmist (and still a self-described "luke warmer") who has infuriated many of her more extremist colleagues by defending skeptics and by testifying to the US House Subcommittee on the Environment that the uncertainties in forecasting climate science are much greater than the alarmists will admit.
As Anthony Watts has noted, this is news guaranteed to make a Warmist's head explode.
The reason it's so significant is that it comes only three years after one of the APS's most distinguished members - Professor Hal Lewis - resigned in disgust at its endorsement of what he called "the global warming scam."
Disturbed by an "appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change" which "was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members", Lewis went public with his letter of resignation to the APS's then President Curtis G Callan Jr. (Callan's replacement Malcolm Beasley appears to be of a more skeptical bent. When he wrote earlier this year to President Obama congratulating him on his support for "science", he studiously avoided any mention of the president's war on climate change)
It began:
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d'être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d'être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
Lewis went on to describe global warming as "the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist."
Yet when Lewis had gathered two hundred plus signatures from fellow members to protest against the APS's position, they found - "Constitution be damned" - that the Council simply refused to accept their petition.
He concluded:
This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don't think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I'm not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
It is inconceivable, given the new panel's constitution, that when the APS releases its new position statement on climate change later this year it will be anything other than broadly skeptical of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.
This will mark a major victory for climate skeptics. Up until now, one of the most effective weapons in the climate alarmists' armoury has been to declare that all the world's major scientific institutions subscribe to the Man-Made Global Warming "Consensus."
These include: Academia Brasiliera de Ciencas; Academia Mexicana de Ciencas; Academie des Sciences (France); Academy of Science of South Africa; Accademia dei Lincei (Italy); American Association for the Advancement of Science; American Astronomical Society; American Chemical Society; American Geophysical Union; American Institute of Physics; American Meteorological Society; Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society; British Antarctic Survey; Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences; Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society; Chinese Academy of Sciences; Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany); 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; Geological Society of London; Indian National Science Academy; International Union for Quaternary Research; International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics; National Academy of Sciences; National Center for Atmospheric Research; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Royal Meteorological Society; Royal Society of Canada; Royal Society; Science Council of Japan.
If that list looks impressive, perhaps it's worth reminding ourselves of Hal Lewis's theory as to why so many scientific institutions have fallen for the scam.
There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst.
Yes the American Physical Society's change of heart is significant but we've a long way to go before that oil tanker turns round. Or, as Churchill might have said: "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
[ you can't make this shit up ]
Scientists seek climate-friendly cow of the future
By Barney Jopson in Washington
A White House climate initiative has boosted a quixotic search for the “cow of the future”, a next-generation creature whose greenhouse gas emissions would be cut by anti-methane pills, burp scanners and gas backpacks.
Carbon dioxide from fossil fuels is the primary man-made gas warming the planet, but methane is far more potent and the US’s biggest source of it is its 88m cattle, which produce more than landfill sites, natural gas leaks or hydraulic fracturing.
More
The Obama administration’s launch last month of a plan to curb methane emissions has given fresh relevance to climate-friendly technologies for cattle that range from dietary supplements and DNA gut tests to strap-on gas tanks.
Juan Tricarico, director of the Cow of the Future project at the Innovation Center for US Dairy, an Illinois research institute, said the initiative had boosted his quest to create the “star athlete” of the bovine world.
“For us it is very encouraging because it basically demonstrates that important players out there are thinking in similar ways to us,” he told the Financial Times.
But he said there were common misconceptions about where cattle methane comes from. “Ninety-seven per cent of all the methane gas is released by the front end through burps, not from the back end,” he said.
Based on his research priorities, the dairy cow of the future will be the unstressed inhabitant of spacious accommodation, munching on anti-methane gourmet grains that are processed by an efficient, best-in-species digestive system.
“We want it to be more productive, we want it to be healthier, we want it to be a problem-free cow,” said Mr Tricarico.
Methane accounts for 9 per cent of US greenhouse gas emissions and does not linger in the air as long as CO2, but it has a global warming effect more than 20 times greater than CO2, the White House says.
However, financial barriers are hampering the adoption of tools to limit methane from cattle, as was the case with early technology to curb pollution from power stations and motor vehicles.
The costs are prohibitive for dairy and beef farmers and the kind of research that could make the tools more cost-effective would require public funding.
C-Lock, a South Dakota company, sells a feeding station that gives animals dietary supplements such as basil to cut methane production and measures the content of their breath by pulling it towards trace gas sensors with a vacuum.
Patrick Zimmerman, C-Lock’s founder, says prices start at $45,000 but stresses the economic benefits of improved efficiency. “Of the energy the animals eat, 3 to 15 per cent is lost as methane and that’s a waste,” he says.
At Argentina’s National Institute of Agricultural Technology, scientists have created backpacks that collect gas via tubes plugged into cows’ stomachs. A typical animal emits 250-300 litres of methane a day and researchers say this could be used to power a car or a refrigerator for a day, but Jorge Antonio Hilbert of the institute says the tanks’ use on a large scale is “totally improbable”.
Jonathan Gelbard of the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, says: “Anyone who can come up with a cost-effective way to harness that methane is going to make a lot of money.”
Ilmi Granoff of the Overseas Development Institute said an alternative to controlling cattle emissions would be to cut the number of cows.
“Forget coal, Forget cars. The fastest way to address climate change would be to dramatically reduce the amount of meat people eat,” he said. “But that involves cultural preferences and they are difficult to touch.”
Scientists seek climate-friendly cow of the future
By Barney Jopson in Washington
A White House climate initiative has boosted a quixotic search for the “cow of the future”, a next-generation creature whose greenhouse gas emissions would be cut by anti-methane pills, burp scanners and gas backpacks.
Carbon dioxide from fossil fuels is the primary man-made gas warming the planet, but methane is far more potent and the US’s biggest source of it is its 88m cattle, which produce more than landfill sites, natural gas leaks or hydraulic fracturing.
More
The Obama administration’s launch last month of a plan to curb methane emissions has given fresh relevance to climate-friendly technologies for cattle that range from dietary supplements and DNA gut tests to strap-on gas tanks.
Juan Tricarico, director of the Cow of the Future project at the Innovation Center for US Dairy, an Illinois research institute, said the initiative had boosted his quest to create the “star athlete” of the bovine world.
“For us it is very encouraging because it basically demonstrates that important players out there are thinking in similar ways to us,” he told the Financial Times.
But he said there were common misconceptions about where cattle methane comes from. “Ninety-seven per cent of all the methane gas is released by the front end through burps, not from the back end,” he said.
Based on his research priorities, the dairy cow of the future will be the unstressed inhabitant of spacious accommodation, munching on anti-methane gourmet grains that are processed by an efficient, best-in-species digestive system.
“We want it to be more productive, we want it to be healthier, we want it to be a problem-free cow,” said Mr Tricarico.
Methane accounts for 9 per cent of US greenhouse gas emissions and does not linger in the air as long as CO2, but it has a global warming effect more than 20 times greater than CO2, the White House says.
However, financial barriers are hampering the adoption of tools to limit methane from cattle, as was the case with early technology to curb pollution from power stations and motor vehicles.
The costs are prohibitive for dairy and beef farmers and the kind of research that could make the tools more cost-effective would require public funding.
C-Lock, a South Dakota company, sells a feeding station that gives animals dietary supplements such as basil to cut methane production and measures the content of their breath by pulling it towards trace gas sensors with a vacuum.
Patrick Zimmerman, C-Lock’s founder, says prices start at $45,000 but stresses the economic benefits of improved efficiency. “Of the energy the animals eat, 3 to 15 per cent is lost as methane and that’s a waste,” he says.
At Argentina’s National Institute of Agricultural Technology, scientists have created backpacks that collect gas via tubes plugged into cows’ stomachs. A typical animal emits 250-300 litres of methane a day and researchers say this could be used to power a car or a refrigerator for a day, but Jorge Antonio Hilbert of the institute says the tanks’ use on a large scale is “totally improbable”.
Jonathan Gelbard of the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, says: “Anyone who can come up with a cost-effective way to harness that methane is going to make a lot of money.”
Ilmi Granoff of the Overseas Development Institute said an alternative to controlling cattle emissions would be to cut the number of cows.
“Forget coal, Forget cars. The fastest way to address climate change would be to dramatically reduce the amount of meat people eat,” he said. “But that involves cultural preferences and they are difficult to touch.”
[h=1]UN finding on climate change is just a bunch of hot air, new report claims[/h] Published April 09, 2014FoxNews.com
Facebook1008 Twitter610 Gplus48
A U.N.-commissioned panel says climate change is hurting the growth of crops, affecting the quality of water supplies and forcing wildlife to change the way it lives – but what if it’s all just smoke and mirrors?
A new report from the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), written by an international collection of scientists and published by the conservative Heartland Institute, claims just that, declaring that humanity's impact on climate is not causing substantial harm to the Earth.
“All across the planet, the historical increase in the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration has stimulated vegetative productivity,” reads a portion of the 1,063-page report, called “Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts.” “This observed stimulation, or greening of the Earth, has occurred in spite of many real and imagined assaults on Earth’s vegetation, including fires, disease, pest outbreaks, deforestation and climatic change.”
The Heartland Institute says more than 30 scientists served as authors and reviewers for the new report, which it claims cites more than 1,000 peer-reviewed studies supporting the belief that climate change is not detrimental to the biosphere. The Heartland Institute describes itself as a think tank promoting public policy "based on individual liberty, limited government and free markets."
The panel of scientists says human impact on the global climate is small, changing temperatures are within a historic scope of temperature variables and there is no net harm to human health of the production of food.
The findings are a stark contrast to the messages from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which in a report released last week concluded that in many regions of the earth, changing precipitation and melting snow are altering hydrological systems, which negatively impact the quantity of water resources.
The IPCC’s report also states that climate change is forcing terrestrial, freshwater and marine species to shift their geographical ranges and migration patterns.
But the Heartland Institute says the scientific community is under tremendous financial and peer pressure to reach the conclusion that global industry is damaging the environment.
“Ethical standards have been lowered, peer review has been corrupted, and we can’t trust peers in our most prestigious journals anymore,” Joe Bast, President and CEO of Heartland Institute, told Fox News.
However, scientists are questioning the credibility of the NIPCC’s findings.
Donald Wuebbels, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Indiana Champaign Urbana, says the report is not peer-reviewed.
“Mostly it’s a bunch of old, retired guys that got together and wrote a report for the Heartland Institute that is basically full of misinformation,” he told Fox News.
The Heartland Institute, which is going to publicly roll out the report Wednesday in Washington, D.C., insists that it is peer-reviewed.
Meanwhile, government officials and top climate scientists are meeting in Berlin this week to approve a draft U.N. study on fossil fuel emissions.
The study asserts that world powers are running out of time to cut their use of high-polluting fossil fuels and stay below agreed limits on global warming, according to Reuters.
The study says nations will have to make drastic pullbacks of greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming to less than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit over pre-industrial times.
The draft study outlines ways to cut emissions and boost low-carbon energy, such as nuclear and solar power, Reuters reports.
Facebook1008 Twitter610 Gplus48
A U.N.-commissioned panel says climate change is hurting the growth of crops, affecting the quality of water supplies and forcing wildlife to change the way it lives – but what if it’s all just smoke and mirrors?
A new report from the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), written by an international collection of scientists and published by the conservative Heartland Institute, claims just that, declaring that humanity's impact on climate is not causing substantial harm to the Earth.
“All across the planet, the historical increase in the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration has stimulated vegetative productivity,” reads a portion of the 1,063-page report, called “Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts.” “This observed stimulation, or greening of the Earth, has occurred in spite of many real and imagined assaults on Earth’s vegetation, including fires, disease, pest outbreaks, deforestation and climatic change.”
The Heartland Institute says more than 30 scientists served as authors and reviewers for the new report, which it claims cites more than 1,000 peer-reviewed studies supporting the belief that climate change is not detrimental to the biosphere. The Heartland Institute describes itself as a think tank promoting public policy "based on individual liberty, limited government and free markets."
The panel of scientists says human impact on the global climate is small, changing temperatures are within a historic scope of temperature variables and there is no net harm to human health of the production of food.
The findings are a stark contrast to the messages from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which in a report released last week concluded that in many regions of the earth, changing precipitation and melting snow are altering hydrological systems, which negatively impact the quantity of water resources.
The IPCC’s report also states that climate change is forcing terrestrial, freshwater and marine species to shift their geographical ranges and migration patterns.
But the Heartland Institute says the scientific community is under tremendous financial and peer pressure to reach the conclusion that global industry is damaging the environment.
“Ethical standards have been lowered, peer review has been corrupted, and we can’t trust peers in our most prestigious journals anymore,” Joe Bast, President and CEO of Heartland Institute, told Fox News.
However, scientists are questioning the credibility of the NIPCC’s findings.
Donald Wuebbels, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Indiana Champaign Urbana, says the report is not peer-reviewed.
“Mostly it’s a bunch of old, retired guys that got together and wrote a report for the Heartland Institute that is basically full of misinformation,” he told Fox News.
The Heartland Institute, which is going to publicly roll out the report Wednesday in Washington, D.C., insists that it is peer-reviewed.
Meanwhile, government officials and top climate scientists are meeting in Berlin this week to approve a draft U.N. study on fossil fuel emissions.
The study asserts that world powers are running out of time to cut their use of high-polluting fossil fuels and stay below agreed limits on global warming, according to Reuters.
The study says nations will have to make drastic pullbacks of greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming to less than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit over pre-industrial times.
The draft study outlines ways to cut emissions and boost low-carbon energy, such as nuclear and solar power, Reuters reports.
