[licence2kill]

in the late 70's: iran
from 2000 to present: china/middle east turmoil

the drop in 2008 is a demand shock

[Tuff]

Originally Posted by FreeEnterprise

This hits Michigan and Ohio the hardest, and they are some of the worst states hurting from the Obama recession...

And it barely affects California and New York, so they'll blindly vote for him again.

Coal isn't the most clean, but it is an energy source we need to utilize for the time being or they country is going to suffer higher costs we cannot afford. You can cnearly see by that map, which states are most affected.

Problem is, you don't get economic recovery unless energy is cheap, and everything Obama and the liberals are doing is INCREASING the cost of energy.

Printing money devalues their income, so they can't do everything they did 3 years ago with their money, as everything has gone UP in cost, while their pay even if it stayed the same, actually went WAY down because of inflation.

It's important to tax everything because we need to pay more taxes to give the democrats more money to play with. They need deck extensions to their 2nd homes.

Health care costs, increased significantly under Obama.
Gas prices increased significantly under Obama.
Food prices increased significantly under Obama.
Clothing prices increased significantly under Obama.

You and Gonzo should have a go in a thread, while everyone else watches.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Tuff

And it barely affects California and New York, so they'll blindly vote for him again.

Coal isn't the most clean, but it is an energy source we need to utilize for the time being or they country is going to suffer higher costs we cannot afford. You can cnearly see by that map, which states are most affected.

You're all about global climate change but **** doing something about it? Perhaps the reasons it affects some states more so than others is the infrastructure is up-to-date? Imagine that.

Originally Posted by Tuff

It's important to tax everything because we need to pay more taxes to give the democrats more money to play with. They need deck extensions to their 2nd homes.

We should lower taxes so Romney can buy a 7th home, right?

Originally Posted by Tuff

You and Gonzo should have a go in a thread, while everyone else watches.

No one would read that **** and PBN would overload from too much energy release as the anti-parties collided.

[barrel roll]

Don't want to be like Louis Alexander Slotin?

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

You're all about global climate change but **** doing something about it? Perhaps the reasons it affects some states more so than others is the infrastructure is up-to-date? Imagine that.

"Climate change" - I'll assume you're talking about the theory of man made Global Warming which is what it was originally called before they changed it - isn't going to be stopped by attempting to use less energy assuming it's real. Just not going to happen in a free society and even if we did, China and other developing nations would be right there to make up for it. If it's actually occurring and actually has a multiplier effect as alarmists say, the best thing to do is figure out how to get off the planet or figure out how to block the sun to compensate for it (sulfur in the uppper atmosphere, etc.).

[chodeyg]

They changed it to climate change because global warming is misleading. Winters would likely be colder and storm activity would increase. Funny how you see a name change as a concession.

[FreeEnterprise]

Originally Posted by chodeyg

They changed it to climate change because global warming is misleading. Winters would likely be colder and storm activity would increase. Funny how you see a name change as a concession.

It is pretty obvious to anyone that pays attention, that whatever you want to call it is a scam to make certain people rich, while others suffer under more government "regulation and taxation"... For the good of the planet or something of course...

http://www.globalclimatescam.com/

[licence2kill]

yeah, scientists from all over the globe are all in on it...

[FreeEnterprise]

Pro-tip... There is no "consensus" of scientists, by their nature, they are not a "follow along" crowd.

Clearly you believe the groupthink... That never ends well...

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by chodeyg

They changed it to climate change because global warming is misleading. Winters would likely be colder and storm activity would increase. Funny how you see a name change as a concession.

It's dishonest, just like changing from "creation" to "intelligent design". I notice you didn't actually talk about my point though.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

"Climate change" - I'll assume you're talking about the theory of man made Global Warming which is what it was originally called before they changed it - isn't going to be stopped by attempting to use less energy assuming it's real. Just not going to happen in a free society and even if we did, China and other developing nations would be right there to make up for it. If it's actually occurring and actually has a multiplier effect as alarmists say, the best thing to do is figure out how to get off the planet or figure out how to block the sun to compensate for it (sulfur in the uppper atmosphere, etc.).

You're right, there's no reason for us to try to do our part.

lol at sulfur in the upper atmosphere.

Originally Posted by FreeEnterprise

Pro-tip... There is no "consensus" of scientists, by their nature, they are not a "follow along" crowd.

Clearly you believe the groupthink... That never ends well...

You're so ignorant to how the scientific community operates it's scary. Have you ever heard of a journal?

Originally Posted by Swerve22

It's dishonest, just like changing from "creation" to "intelligent design". I notice you didn't actually talk about my point though.

Global warming was dishonest, climate change is more inclusive, less accusatory and less leading.

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

You're right, there's no reason for us to try to do our part.

lol at sulfur in the upper atmosphere.

lol @ thinking we can curb energy use back to 1800's levels.

Global warming was dishonest, climate change is more inclusive, less accusatory and less leading.

AKA anything that happens in the environment can be blamed on it.

[chodeyg]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

It's dishonest, just like changing from "creation" to "intelligent design". I notice you didn't actually talk about my point though.

I don't think its dishonest, I think its more accurate. Global temperatures will rise on average but its not like we will be sipping daquiris in February. The reason I didn't comment on the rest of your post is because I agree with it, it will be years before we could ever convince countries like China to cut back on their emissions. I do believe leading by example is a decent start that could lead us to be less dependent on foreign energy. It would also allow us to patent technology that we could export down the road.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

"Climate change" - I'll assume you're talking about the theory of man made Global Warming which is what it was originally called before they changed it - isn't going to be stopped by attempting to use less energy assuming it's real. Just not going to happen in a free society and even if we did, China and other developing nations would be right there to make up for it. If it's actually occurring and actually has a multiplier effect as alarmists say, the best thing to do is figure out how to get off the planet or figure out how to block the sun to compensate for it (sulfur in the uppper atmosphere, etc.).

Two things you really need to take in consideration concerning the global warming debate:

1) Real or not, it gets us talking about our species impact on the planet we live on. This is never a bad thing.

2) Assuming it is all true, the human cause is due to industrial society. Industrial society is entirely contingent on the availability of carbon based fossil fuels. We are rapidly exhausting the available supply. It is likely to conclude that the extravagant industrial society will fade out with our supply of fossil fuels. So the problem of man made global warming solves itself.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

lol @ thinking we can curb energy use back to 1800's levels.

Who said anything about curbing energy usage?

Originally Posted by Swerve22

AKA anything that happens in the environment can be blamed on it.

Or it allows a much broader research range to include variables other than humans.