Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Lawmakers "tackle" Global Warming--and whiff

Expand Messages
  • Mike Doran <mike@usinter.net>
    http://www.weather.com/newscenter/topstories/030109globalwarmingpropos al.html Lawmakers tackle Global Warming Thu, Jan. 09, 2003 9:13 AM ET By the Associated
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 9, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      http://www.weather.com/newscenter/topstories/030109globalwarmingpropos
      al.html

      Lawmakers tackle Global Warming
      Thu, Jan. 09, 2003 9:13 AM ET

      By the Associated Press


      WASHINGTON (AP) A new bill aimed at combatting global warming is an
      important step forward for the Pacific Northwest, Democratic
      lawmakers say.

      Senators John McCain, R-Ariz., and Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., have
      proposed requiring a huge swath of U.S. industry to cut emissions of
      carbon dioxide and other warming gases back to 2000 levels by 2010,
      and to 1990 levels by 2016.

      Their bill would affect power plants, manufacturers, petroleum
      refiners and other large-scale commercial sources, and set up a
      trading system similar to one created to fight acid rain.

      Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., on Wednesday called the bill "a commonsense
      and economically viable way to reduce the downside of global
      warming."

      Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., called it the best environmental news
      of the new year.

      But the proposal faces strong opposition from the Bush administration
      and Republican leaders in the Senate.

      Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., the new chairman of the Senate
      Environment Committee, has no interest in the McCain-Lieberman bill,
      said Inhofe's spokesman, Gary Hoitsma.

      "We're going to be more supportive of the Bush administration's
      approach to this issue, which is not to move toward a mandatory
      regulatory regime," Hoitsma said. "I can't see the committee ...
      moving a bill that the president's not going to sign."

      Environmental groups praised Lieberman and McCain for helping jump-
      start the debate over global climate change.

      Many scientists believe that the burning of fossil fuels is causing
      an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, triggering what is called
      the greenhouse effect. A higher concentration of carbon dioxide in
      the atmosphere would trap more of the sun's heat, possibly causing
      temperatures to rise.

      Inslee, who has called for a national commitment to develop clean
      energy similar to the 1960s effort to explore space, called the new
      proposal important substantively and symbolically. By introducing it
      the week Congress convened, the two senators showed the importance of
      climate change, he said.

      The bill itself "is a very important step forward for the Pacific
      Northwest, because we have some very acute problems that we are
      likely to face if we don't come to grips and take some positive steps
      here in Congress," Inslee said.

      Eastern Washington irrigated farms, for instance, could be at risk in
      coming years because of a potential reduction in winter snowpack as a
      result of global warming, Inslee said. With less snow, there's also a
      risk that the entire Columbia River system will have to be greatly
      expanded to keep pace with the region's demand for hydroelectric
      power, he said.

      "Snowpack is like a giant electric battery," Inslee said. "Without it
      it's harder to capture precipitation and you have reduced electric
      capacity."

      Blumenauer, who attended the World Summit on Sustainable Development
      last year in South Africa, said the Northwest has already seen some
      extreme weather patterns that are bound to get worse.

      "From an Oregonian/Northwest perspective, I think this is really
      good, because we have a lot at risk in the Northwest," he said.

      From a political perspective, the bill shows a refreshing willingness
      to take on the administration, Blumenauer and Inslee said.

      "This is a good signal to start the new session: a bipartisan
      interest in some meaningful environmental legislation," Blumenauer
      said. "We haven't had a lot of good news in the last year relative to
      the environment."

      But a spokeswoman for a conservative think tank that opposes the bill
      said the legislation would harm the economy and kill jobs.


      ++++++++++++++++++

      COMMENTS:

      I have a number of comments on the above article.

      First, from an apolitical standpoint, missing EMFs and Gaia is
      occurring by Dems and Repubs alike. The political blowback is mixing
      up impacted areas by those not. IOW, the Mississippi delta is Gaia
      overactive right now so states like Oklahoma are not feeling the bite-
      -whereas post Three Gorge diversion and Colorado delta/GOC/Sea of
      Cortez Gaia death conditions have resulted in ultra poor Gaia
      conditions in the states where those sponsering the law reside. The
      NE relative to Lieberman has been impacted through its hydrology w/
      drought, too--but there the dams on the Orinoco, Amazon, and W.
      Africa are tied as well as what an over active GOM causes.

      Meanwhile, Gale Norton is tatamount to complete mental retardation on
      the river/dam issues. The most recent ploy is to move Colorado river
      allocations to San Diego--where lots of Republicans reside. This kind
      of political gerrymandering is absolutely blind to how the hydrology
      works with the biosphere--and the best approach to date in this
      respect is CalFed--which has an administrative approach which allots
      flow to the eustories of the delta--to protect the "ducks" and other
      aspects of the ecology of the delta. By blind luck, this happens to
      cause a steady state of the Gaia microbrial feedbacks that bring
      siesmic and hydrological stability to a region.
    • fredwx1 <fredwx1@yahoo.com>
      How does
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 13, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        <By blind luck, this happens to cause a steady state of the Gaia
        microbrial feedbacks that bring siesmic and hydrological stability to
        a region. > How does this effect siesmic activity?

        Secondly, In an effort to reduce CO2 emmisions, how might a move to
        hydrogen based fuels effect Gaia?



        --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Doran <mike@u...>"
        <mike@u...> wrote:
        >
        >
        http://www.weather.com/newscenter/topstories/030109globalwarmingpropos
        > al.html
        >
        > Lawmakers tackle Global Warming
        > Thu, Jan. 09, 2003 9:13 AM ET
        >
        > By the Associated Press
        >
        >
        > WASHINGTON (AP) A new bill aimed at combatting global warming is an
        > important step forward for the Pacific Northwest, Democratic
        > lawmakers say.
        >
        > Senators John McCain, R-Ariz., and Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., have
        > proposed requiring a huge swath of U.S. industry to cut emissions
        of
        > carbon dioxide and other warming gases back to 2000 levels by 2010,
        > and to 1990 levels by 2016.
        >
        > Their bill would affect power plants, manufacturers, petroleum
        > refiners and other large-scale commercial sources, and set up a
        > trading system similar to one created to fight acid rain.
        >
        > Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., on Wednesday called the bill "a
        commonsense
        > and economically viable way to reduce the downside of global
        > warming."
        >
        > Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., called it the best environmental news
        > of the new year.
        >
        > But the proposal faces strong opposition from the Bush
        administration
        > and Republican leaders in the Senate.
        >
        > Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., the new chairman of the Senate
        > Environment Committee, has no interest in the McCain-Lieberman
        bill,
        > said Inhofe's spokesman, Gary Hoitsma.
        >
        > "We're going to be more supportive of the Bush administration's
        > approach to this issue, which is not to move toward a mandatory
        > regulatory regime," Hoitsma said. "I can't see the committee ...
        > moving a bill that the president's not going to sign."
        >
        > Environmental groups praised Lieberman and McCain for helping jump-
        > start the debate over global climate change.
        >
        > Many scientists believe that the burning of fossil fuels is causing
        > an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, triggering what is
        called
        > the greenhouse effect. A higher concentration of carbon dioxide in
        > the atmosphere would trap more of the sun's heat, possibly causing
        > temperatures to rise.
        >
        > Inslee, who has called for a national commitment to develop clean
        > energy similar to the 1960s effort to explore space, called the new
        > proposal important substantively and symbolically. By introducing
        it
        > the week Congress convened, the two senators showed the importance
        of
        > climate change, he said.
        >
        > The bill itself "is a very important step forward for the Pacific
        > Northwest, because we have some very acute problems that we are
        > likely to face if we don't come to grips and take some positive
        steps
        > here in Congress," Inslee said.
        >
        > Eastern Washington irrigated farms, for instance, could be at risk
        in
        > coming years because of a potential reduction in winter snowpack as
        a
        > result of global warming, Inslee said. With less snow, there's also
        a
        > risk that the entire Columbia River system will have to be greatly
        > expanded to keep pace with the region's demand for hydroelectric
        > power, he said.
        >
        > "Snowpack is like a giant electric battery," Inslee said. "Without
        it
        > it's harder to capture precipitation and you have reduced electric
        > capacity."
        >
        > Blumenauer, who attended the World Summit on Sustainable
        Development
        > last year in South Africa, said the Northwest has already seen some
        > extreme weather patterns that are bound to get worse.
        >
        > "From an Oregonian/Northwest perspective, I think this is really
        > good, because we have a lot at risk in the Northwest," he said.
        >
        > From a political perspective, the bill shows a refreshing
        willingness
        > to take on the administration, Blumenauer and Inslee said.
        >
        > "This is a good signal to start the new session: a bipartisan
        > interest in some meaningful environmental legislation," Blumenauer
        > said. "We haven't had a lot of good news in the last year relative
        to
        > the environment."
        >
        > But a spokeswoman for a conservative think tank that opposes the
        bill
        > said the legislation would harm the economy and kill jobs.
        >
        >
        > ++++++++++++++++++
        >
        > COMMENTS:
        >
        > I have a number of comments on the above article.
        >
        > First, from an apolitical standpoint, missing EMFs and Gaia is
        > occurring by Dems and Repubs alike. The political blowback is
        mixing
        > up impacted areas by those not. IOW, the Mississippi delta is Gaia
        > overactive right now so states like Oklahoma are not feeling the
        bite-
        > -whereas post Three Gorge diversion and Colorado delta/GOC/Sea of
        > Cortez Gaia death conditions have resulted in ultra poor Gaia
        > conditions in the states where those sponsering the law reside. The
        > NE relative to Lieberman has been impacted through its hydrology w/
        > drought, too--but there the dams on the Orinoco, Amazon, and W.
        > Africa are tied as well as what an over active GOM causes.
        >
        > Meanwhile, Gale Norton is tatamount to complete mental retardation
        on
        > the river/dam issues. The most recent ploy is to move Colorado
        river
        > allocations to San Diego--where lots of Republicans reside. This
        kind
        > of political gerrymandering is absolutely blind to how the
        hydrology
        > works with the biosphere--and the best approach to date in this
        > respect is CalFed--which has an administrative approach which
        allots
        > flow to the eustories of the delta--to protect the "ducks" and
        other
        > aspects of the ecology of the delta. By blind luck, this happens to
        > cause a steady state of the Gaia microbrial feedbacks that bring
        > siesmic and hydrological stability to a region.
      • Mike Doran <mike@usinter.net>
        ... to ... Simply because hydrates are less dense then ocean water--but are compositied with the sediments and cemented to the base rock. If there is MH
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 13, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "fredwx1 <fredwx1@y...>"
          <fredwx1@y...> wrote:
          > <By blind luck, this happens to cause a steady state of the Gaia
          > microbrial feedbacks that bring siesmic and hydrological stability
          to
          > a region. > How does this effect siesmic activity?

          Simply because hydrates are less dense then ocean water--but are
          compositied with the sediments and cemented to the base rock. If
          there is MH instability it unforms and the methane is dissolved in
          the ocean water and the water is free to flow upwards--and the
          sediments free to move down. This impacts the DENSITY of a given
          strata and like a tube of toothpaste getting squeezed impacts siesmic
          zones--such as the one here in the NW as the ocean plate slips under
          the land plate and sediments are scrapped off to form the coastal
          mountains. There is further genetic proof the the causal link--in
          that sulfur loving archae, although not as closely related as the
          methanogens and salt loving archae are, remain genetically connected
          to the other two archae--over huge timescales. This is improbable
          without the symbiotic connection of siesmic activity because the
          source of sulfur is tectonic!

          >
          > Secondly, In an effort to reduce CO2 emmisions, how might a move to
          > hydrogen based fuels effect Gaia?

          If methane is burned there is less carbon per energy unit. Indeed
          the move by the biosphere itself to methane probably has some
          evolutionary logic in the same way--due to how CO2 changes
          conductivity as much as it does when concentrated. But on a more
          serious note the use of hydrates would have a profound EMF/Gaia
          implication--like stripping the insulation off of a wire on the
          ground. However, as we learn these mechanisms and the chaotic
          stimulas involved--that might be the desired impact. Much to learn
          here!

          This is why this is one of coolest discussion groups on the web!

          >
          >
          >
          > --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Doran <mike@u...>"
          > <mike@u...> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          >
          http://www.weather.com/newscenter/topstories/030109globalwarmingpropos
          > > al.html
          > >
          > > Lawmakers tackle Global Warming
          > > Thu, Jan. 09, 2003 9:13 AM ET
          > >
          > > By the Associated Press
          > >
          > >
          > > WASHINGTON (AP) A new bill aimed at combatting global warming is
          an
          > > important step forward for the Pacific Northwest, Democratic
          > > lawmakers say.
          > >
          > > Senators John McCain, R-Ariz., and Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.,
          have
          > > proposed requiring a huge swath of U.S. industry to cut emissions
          > of
          > > carbon dioxide and other warming gases back to 2000 levels by
          2010,
          > > and to 1990 levels by 2016.
          > >
          > > Their bill would affect power plants, manufacturers, petroleum
          > > refiners and other large-scale commercial sources, and set up a
          > > trading system similar to one created to fight acid rain.
          > >
          > > Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., on Wednesday called the bill "a
          > commonsense
          > > and economically viable way to reduce the downside of global
          > > warming."
          > >
          > > Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., called it the best environmental
          news
          > > of the new year.
          > >
          > > But the proposal faces strong opposition from the Bush
          > administration
          > > and Republican leaders in the Senate.
          > >
          > > Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., the new chairman of the Senate
          > > Environment Committee, has no interest in the McCain-Lieberman
          > bill,
          > > said Inhofe's spokesman, Gary Hoitsma.
          > >
          > > "We're going to be more supportive of the Bush administration's
          > > approach to this issue, which is not to move toward a mandatory
          > > regulatory regime," Hoitsma said. "I can't see the committee ...
          > > moving a bill that the president's not going to sign."
          > >
          > > Environmental groups praised Lieberman and McCain for helping
          jump-
          > > start the debate over global climate change.
          > >
          > > Many scientists believe that the burning of fossil fuels is
          causing
          > > an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, triggering what is
          > called
          > > the greenhouse effect. A higher concentration of carbon dioxide
          in
          > > the atmosphere would trap more of the sun's heat, possibly
          causing
          > > temperatures to rise.
          > >
          > > Inslee, who has called for a national commitment to develop clean
          > > energy similar to the 1960s effort to explore space, called the
          new
          > > proposal important substantively and symbolically. By introducing
          > it
          > > the week Congress convened, the two senators showed the
          importance
          > of
          > > climate change, he said.
          > >
          > > The bill itself "is a very important step forward for the Pacific
          > > Northwest, because we have some very acute problems that we are
          > > likely to face if we don't come to grips and take some positive
          > steps
          > > here in Congress," Inslee said.
          > >
          > > Eastern Washington irrigated farms, for instance, could be at
          risk
          > in
          > > coming years because of a potential reduction in winter snowpack
          as
          > a
          > > result of global warming, Inslee said. With less snow, there's
          also
          > a
          > > risk that the entire Columbia River system will have to be
          greatly
          > > expanded to keep pace with the region's demand for hydroelectric
          > > power, he said.
          > >
          > > "Snowpack is like a giant electric battery," Inslee
          said. "Without
          > it
          > > it's harder to capture precipitation and you have reduced
          electric
          > > capacity."
          > >
          > > Blumenauer, who attended the World Summit on Sustainable
          > Development
          > > last year in South Africa, said the Northwest has already seen
          some
          > > extreme weather patterns that are bound to get worse.
          > >
          > > "From an Oregonian/Northwest perspective, I think this is really
          > > good, because we have a lot at risk in the Northwest," he said.
          > >
          > > From a political perspective, the bill shows a refreshing
          > willingness
          > > to take on the administration, Blumenauer and Inslee said.
          > >
          > > "This is a good signal to start the new session: a bipartisan
          > > interest in some meaningful environmental legislation,"
          Blumenauer
          > > said. "We haven't had a lot of good news in the last year
          relative
          > to
          > > the environment."
          > >
          > > But a spokeswoman for a conservative think tank that opposes the
          > bill
          > > said the legislation would harm the economy and kill jobs.
          > >
          > >
          > > ++++++++++++++++++
          > >
          > > COMMENTS:
          > >
          > > I have a number of comments on the above article.
          > >
          > > First, from an apolitical standpoint, missing EMFs and Gaia is
          > > occurring by Dems and Repubs alike. The political blowback is
          > mixing
          > > up impacted areas by those not. IOW, the Mississippi delta is
          Gaia
          > > overactive right now so states like Oklahoma are not feeling the
          > bite-
          > > -whereas post Three Gorge diversion and Colorado delta/GOC/Sea of
          > > Cortez Gaia death conditions have resulted in ultra poor Gaia
          > > conditions in the states where those sponsering the law reside.
          The
          > > NE relative to Lieberman has been impacted through its hydrology
          w/
          > > drought, too--but there the dams on the Orinoco, Amazon, and W.
          > > Africa are tied as well as what an over active GOM causes.
          > >
          > > Meanwhile, Gale Norton is tatamount to complete mental
          retardation
          > on
          > > the river/dam issues. The most recent ploy is to move Colorado
          > river
          > > allocations to San Diego--where lots of Republicans reside. This
          > kind
          > > of political gerrymandering is absolutely blind to how the
          > hydrology
          > > works with the biosphere--and the best approach to date in this
          > > respect is CalFed--which has an administrative approach which
          > allots
          > > flow to the eustories of the delta--to protect the "ducks" and
          > other
          > > aspects of the ecology of the delta. By blind luck, this happens
          to
          > > cause a steady state of the Gaia microbrial feedbacks that bring
          > > siesmic and hydrological stability to a region.
        • Mike Doran <mike@usinter.net>
          http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/SST_INDEX.gif http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom_loop.gif http://www.fnoc.navy.mil/products/OTIS/US058VMET-
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 13, 2003
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
          • David <b1blancer1@earthlink.net>
            Mike, take a look at these. http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/images/west_antarctic/tchga1.gif
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 13, 2003
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Mike, take a look at these.

              http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/images/west_antarctic/tchga1.gif
              http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/images/west_antarctic/tchgb1.gif

              As you can see, the earth is now cooler than it was a mere 5000 years
              ago, and substantially cooler than it was 100,000 years ago. In fact,
              we are just now really recovering from the last ice age. If the
              temperature estimates on those graphs are correct, then the earth
              undergoes a significant warm-up about every 100,000 years, and we're
              due for one now. The pattern seems to hold quite well for the last
              400,000 years or so. As can also be seen, when the warm-up occurs, it
              does so quite suddenly, as does the cool-down that follows several
              thousand years later.

              I believe that the Earth is indeed warming, and that it's doing so
              right on schedule. Modern man, and by modern I mean within the last
              10,000 years, has actually only been around for what is a relatively
              cool period in Earth's climate history. We haven't seen a warm period,
              which is what we're headed for now. For that matter, the polar ice
              caps are only a relatively recent feature. There have been times when
              they didn't exist.

              Your thoughts Mike? Anybody?
            • fredwx1 <fredwx1@yahoo.com>
              I meant to ask about burning hydrogen itself instead of hydrocarbon compounds like methane. ... stability ... siesmic ... under ... connected ... to ...
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 14, 2003
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                I meant to ask about burning hydrogen itself instead of hydrocarbon
                compounds like methane.


                --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Doran <mike@u...>"
                <mike@u...> wrote:
                > --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "fredwx1 <fredwx1@y...>"
                > <fredwx1@y...> wrote:
                > > <By blind luck, this happens to cause a steady state of the Gaia
                > > microbrial feedbacks that bring siesmic and hydrological
                stability
                > to
                > > a region. > How does this effect siesmic activity?
                >
                > Simply because hydrates are less dense then ocean water--but are
                > compositied with the sediments and cemented to the base rock. If
                > there is MH instability it unforms and the methane is dissolved in
                > the ocean water and the water is free to flow upwards--and the
                > sediments free to move down. This impacts the DENSITY of a given
                > strata and like a tube of toothpaste getting squeezed impacts
                siesmic
                > zones--such as the one here in the NW as the ocean plate slips
                under
                > the land plate and sediments are scrapped off to form the coastal
                > mountains. There is further genetic proof the the causal link--in
                > that sulfur loving archae, although not as closely related as the
                > methanogens and salt loving archae are, remain genetically
                connected
                > to the other two archae--over huge timescales. This is improbable
                > without the symbiotic connection of siesmic activity because the
                > source of sulfur is tectonic!
                >
                > >
                > > Secondly, In an effort to reduce CO2 emmisions, how might a move
                to
                > > hydrogen based fuels effect Gaia?
                >
                > If methane is burned there is less carbon per energy unit. Indeed
                > the move by the biosphere itself to methane probably has some
                > evolutionary logic in the same way--due to how CO2 changes
                > conductivity as much as it does when concentrated. But on a more
                > serious note the use of hydrates would have a profound EMF/Gaia
                > implication--like stripping the insulation off of a wire on the
                > ground. However, as we learn these mechanisms and the chaotic
                > stimulas involved--that might be the desired impact. Much to learn
                > here!
                >
                > This is why this is one of coolest discussion groups on the web!
                >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Doran
                <mike@u...>"
                > > <mike@u...> wrote:
                > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
                http://www.weather.com/newscenter/topstories/030109globalwarmingpropos
                > > > al.html
                > > >
                > > > Lawmakers tackle Global Warming
                > > > Thu, Jan. 09, 2003 9:13 AM ET
                > > >
                > > > By the Associated Press
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > WASHINGTON (AP) A new bill aimed at combatting global warming
                is
                > an
                > > > important step forward for the Pacific Northwest, Democratic
                > > > lawmakers say.
                > > >
                > > > Senators John McCain, R-Ariz., and Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.,
                > have
                > > > proposed requiring a huge swath of U.S. industry to cut
                emissions
                > > of
                > > > carbon dioxide and other warming gases back to 2000 levels by
                > 2010,
                > > > and to 1990 levels by 2016.
                > > >
                > > > Their bill would affect power plants, manufacturers, petroleum
                > > > refiners and other large-scale commercial sources, and set up a
                > > > trading system similar to one created to fight acid rain.
                > > >
                > > > Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., on Wednesday called the bill "a
                > > commonsense
                > > > and economically viable way to reduce the downside of global
                > > > warming."
                > > >
                > > > Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., called it the best environmental
                > news
                > > > of the new year.
                > > >
                > > > But the proposal faces strong opposition from the Bush
                > > administration
                > > > and Republican leaders in the Senate.
                > > >
                > > > Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., the new chairman of the Senate
                > > > Environment Committee, has no interest in the McCain-Lieberman
                > > bill,
                > > > said Inhofe's spokesman, Gary Hoitsma.
                > > >
                > > > "We're going to be more supportive of the Bush administration's
                > > > approach to this issue, which is not to move toward a mandatory
                > > > regulatory regime," Hoitsma said. "I can't see the
                committee ...
                > > > moving a bill that the president's not going to sign."
                > > >
                > > > Environmental groups praised Lieberman and McCain for helping
                > jump-
                > > > start the debate over global climate change.
                > > >
                > > > Many scientists believe that the burning of fossil fuels is
                > causing
                > > > an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, triggering what is
                > > called
                > > > the greenhouse effect. A higher concentration of carbon dioxide
                > in
                > > > the atmosphere would trap more of the sun's heat, possibly
                > causing
                > > > temperatures to rise.
                > > >
                > > > Inslee, who has called for a national commitment to develop
                clean
                > > > energy similar to the 1960s effort to explore space, called the
                > new
                > > > proposal important substantively and symbolically. By
                introducing
                > > it
                > > > the week Congress convened, the two senators showed the
                > importance
                > > of
                > > > climate change, he said.
                > > >
                > > > The bill itself "is a very important step forward for the
                Pacific
                > > > Northwest, because we have some very acute problems that we are
                > > > likely to face if we don't come to grips and take some positive
                > > steps
                > > > here in Congress," Inslee said.
                > > >
                > > > Eastern Washington irrigated farms, for instance, could be at
                > risk
                > > in
                > > > coming years because of a potential reduction in winter
                snowpack
                > as
                > > a
                > > > result of global warming, Inslee said. With less snow, there's
                > also
                > > a
                > > > risk that the entire Columbia River system will have to be
                > greatly
                > > > expanded to keep pace with the region's demand for
                hydroelectric
                > > > power, he said.
                > > >
                > > > "Snowpack is like a giant electric battery," Inslee
                > said. "Without
                > > it
                > > > it's harder to capture precipitation and you have reduced
                > electric
                > > > capacity."
                > > >
                > > > Blumenauer, who attended the World Summit on Sustainable
                > > Development
                > > > last year in South Africa, said the Northwest has already seen
                > some
                > > > extreme weather patterns that are bound to get worse.
                > > >
                > > > "From an Oregonian/Northwest perspective, I think this is
                really
                > > > good, because we have a lot at risk in the Northwest," he said.
                > > >
                > > > From a political perspective, the bill shows a refreshing
                > > willingness
                > > > to take on the administration, Blumenauer and Inslee said.
                > > >
                > > > "This is a good signal to start the new session: a bipartisan
                > > > interest in some meaningful environmental legislation,"
                > Blumenauer
                > > > said. "We haven't had a lot of good news in the last year
                > relative
                > > to
                > > > the environment."
                > > >
                > > > But a spokeswoman for a conservative think tank that opposes
                the
                > > bill
                > > > said the legislation would harm the economy and kill jobs.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > ++++++++++++++++++
                > > >
                > > > COMMENTS:
                > > >
                > > > I have a number of comments on the above article.
                > > >
                > > > First, from an apolitical standpoint, missing EMFs and Gaia is
                > > > occurring by Dems and Repubs alike. The political blowback is
                > > mixing
                > > > up impacted areas by those not. IOW, the Mississippi delta is
                > Gaia
                > > > overactive right now so states like Oklahoma are not feeling
                the
                > > bite-
                > > > -whereas post Three Gorge diversion and Colorado delta/GOC/Sea
                of
                > > > Cortez Gaia death conditions have resulted in ultra poor Gaia
                > > > conditions in the states where those sponsering the law reside.
                > The
                > > > NE relative to Lieberman has been impacted through its
                hydrology
                > w/
                > > > drought, too--but there the dams on the Orinoco, Amazon, and W.
                > > > Africa are tied as well as what an over active GOM causes.
                > > >
                > > > Meanwhile, Gale Norton is tatamount to complete mental
                > retardation
                > > on
                > > > the river/dam issues. The most recent ploy is to move Colorado
                > > river
                > > > allocations to San Diego--where lots of Republicans reside.
                This
                > > kind
                > > > of political gerrymandering is absolutely blind to how the
                > > hydrology
                > > > works with the biosphere--and the best approach to date in this
                > > > respect is CalFed--which has an administrative approach which
                > > allots
                > > > flow to the eustories of the delta--to protect the "ducks" and
                > > other
                > > > aspects of the ecology of the delta. By blind luck, this
                happens
                > to
                > > > cause a steady state of the Gaia microbrial feedbacks that
                bring
                > > > siesmic and hydrological stability to a region.
              • Mike Doran <mike@usinter.net>
                The LIA is a Keeling Whorf tidal movement that unforms MHs, IMHO. That is a 1900 year cycle and we are mid range in that. There may be some gamma ray issues
                Message 7 of 7 , Jan 18, 2003
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  The LIA is a Keeling Whorf tidal movement that unforms MHs, IMHO.
                  That is a 1900 year cycle and we are mid range in that.

                  There may be some gamma ray issues that impact the water vapor cycle.

                  The question isn't these oscillations but the biosphere's modulation
                  of those random inputs.

                  IOW it isn't chaos then chaos now but modulation then modulation now--
                  the question you ask is fair but not correct.

                  Human changes can result in temperatures that are in line with life
                  but then a body can be dead but situated in a room temperature that
                  is 98.7 degrees F. and appear alive. Such is the Dust Bowl, the
                  fires in Colorado and Arizona, the drought in the SW during an "El
                  Nino" and so forth.

                  --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David <b1blancer1@e...>"
                  <b1blancer1@e...> wrote:
                  > Mike, take a look at these.
                  >
                  > http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/images/west_antarctic/tchga1.gif
                  > http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/images/west_antarctic/tchgb1.gif
                  >
                  > As you can see, the earth is now cooler than it was a mere 5000
                  years
                  > ago, and substantially cooler than it was 100,000 years ago. In
                  fact,
                  > we are just now really recovering from the last ice age. If the
                  > temperature estimates on those graphs are correct, then the earth
                  > undergoes a significant warm-up about every 100,000 years, and we're
                  > due for one now. The pattern seems to hold quite well for the last
                  > 400,000 years or so. As can also be seen, when the warm-up occurs,
                  it
                  > does so quite suddenly, as does the cool-down that follows several
                  > thousand years later.
                  >
                  > I believe that the Earth is indeed warming, and that it's doing so
                  > right on schedule. Modern man, and by modern I mean within the last
                  > 10,000 years, has actually only been around for what is a relatively
                  > cool period in Earth's climate history. We haven't seen a warm
                  period,
                  > which is what we're headed for now. For that matter, the polar ice
                  > caps are only a relatively recent feature. There have been times
                  when
                  > they didn't exist.
                  >
                  > Your thoughts Mike? Anybody?
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.