A Republican Case for Climate Action

[oldguystudent]

If you want ideological reasoning, here it is: God gave us stewardship over the planet that He created. Are we doing a good job of that?

My daughter is in all pre-AP classes in Lewisville. The issue of stewardship was discussed in science when the concept of global warming arose. The consensus among the students was that global warming with human activity as a factor was indeed possible, but it didn't matter because Jesus would return within three years anyway. The class agreed among themselves that this was the best answer, and the teacher nodded in agreement. My kid came home pretty frustrated that day.

Now, this isn't meant to say that a bunch of sixth graders should be an example in any of this, but it does, to me, reflect what their parents are teaching them, and their parents are the people voting and influencing activity or lack thereof.

[GTWT]

Rick,

But Nuclear Energy is frowned on by this administration

Sorry Rick, that's not true:

http://nuclearstreet.com/nuclear_power_industry_news/b/nuclear_power_news/archive/2013/06/26/obama-climate-plan-reiterates-support-for-nuclear-power_2c00_-smr-development-062601.aspx#.UgJF06wYP1w

they are not going to move on t, he Keystone any time soon, they have committed all out war on the coal industry

I hope you're right. Accessing more fossil fuel isn't the solution to green-house gas emissions.

I'll tell you what, trace the money back to where it's going and if you can prove to me that those four liberal republicans (RINO's as we call them) aren't making a penny from the policies they are pushing for then I'll give it consideration.

No true Republican would....

Rick, I'm glad you care about the world. You have children & I'm sure you want them to live in a healthy world with the resources needed to ensure their quality of life. Scientists want the same thing. Science isn't some vast conspiracy to drive up the price you pay for gasoline or to make you ride a bicycle to work.

Scientists are trained to think about long-term consequences. The long-term consequence of our current energy policy is a degraded ecosystem. The sort-term consequence of complying with the policies the scientists suggest will be painful. It still beats the alternative.

Edited August 7, 2013 by GTWT

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Which oil company doesn't want the Keystone?

And the crazed Nuclear accident what-ifs are endless...which seems to satisfy those on the left despite the fact there has been nuke waste transport for years without any major catastrophe in the U.S. that I recall?

So lets continue down the road we are on.

Rick

..

-- Can't name them (many are smaller operations and/or not names a lot of people not in business or in oil country would recognize ...production companies, not retail ) ... but several articles in local paper claims it is unnecessary at the present... The USA is not importing anywhere near the amount of oil that it was 10 years ago. Production in Texas, New Mexico and North Dakota is huge compared to then due to new technology in fracking... and even in Alaska there is concern that not enough oil is now flowing down that pipeline to keep it operating properly ... it freezes if it too little flows and goes too slow (much of it is above ground). .Eventually Keystone will be needed but not now according to many.... and pick a sensible route, not a political one. That last bit is one reason we have weapons systems or planes... even the military doesn't want.... they want them manufactured in their district for employment purposes.... and that includes "conservative" as well as "liberal" politicians. True conservatives want that nonsense cut out.

-- Every good engineer and scientist, asks "what if" ... because "what-ifs" do happen.. and when they do you better be prepared to deal with it. Every fireman should know that... .So are you prepared to deal with a train wreak or truck wreck with an insane amount highly radio-active waste? A lot people in Japan basicly committed suicide to lessen the effect in the Japanese plant.. They stayed and they died. This is not as left/right issue and you portray EVERYTHING. Nuke power sounds great ...until you think of all the waste it creates and how difficult it is to deal with. ............ Nuke power stations are supposed to be able to survive a plane crash... but actually would they? and if destroyed enough they might get terrible in a hurry as they did in Japans earthquake.. actually the Tsunami did the real damage which started a chain reaction of events. .... some terrorist might be willing to try ... 9-11 occurred didn't it.... and no fix is available for that as was in NYC which was tear it up then haul it off..

Edited August 7, 2013 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[UNT Five&Dime]

Even though recorded history indicates that there has been changes in the climate over time I truely believe this one is real and IS man made. I do believe the Sun is getting hotter. A lot hotter! But I don't believe that is has anything to do with factories, cars, farts and anything else. I think the truth is we are witnessing the wrath of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Anyone who thinks for one minute that we can continually shake our fist in God"s face and not expect repercussions is not very well informed as to the Truth. I personally think we are experiencing what the Bible calls birth pangs" Maybe we are in the early stages of the Tribulation? One thing I know for sure, its not going to get any better. Best to prepare. Sorry. Wish I could spin the Truth.

Lets all hope we can get this football season in. GO MEAN GREEN!!!

[oldguystudent]

I could go back pretty much every year to the year I was born, and show nearly the exact same paragraph written by one of my parents, relatives, church elders. Hell, I can trace that paragraph back at least 160 years. Nobody knows the hour or day, like a thief in the night and whatnot, but somebody's ALWAYS cracked the code and predicts the end within a short period of time. Meanwhile, let's watch the world burn because it doesn't matter anyway. We'll leave the ashes and the rubble for those left behind (mmm...Christian horror lit.)

[MeanGreenTexan]

I could go back pretty much every year to the year I was born, and show nearly the exact same paragraph written by one of my parents, relatives, church elders. Hell, I can trace that paragraph back at least 160 years. Nobody knows the hour or day, like a thief in the night and whatnot, but somebody's ALWAYS cracked the code and predicts the end within a short period of time. Meanwhile, let's watch the world burn because it doesn't matter anyway. We'll leave the ashes and the rubble for those left behind (mmm...Christian horror lit.)

Totally agree. I always find those prognostications funny as well.

No one knows..., and some Christians are certainly guilty of the last 2 sentences, but we're really supposed to treasure God's creation. I certainly do, just in case you thought ALL Christians feel that way.

[FirefightnRick]

Sorry Rick, that's not true:

http://nuclearstreet.com/nuclear_power_industry_news/b/nuclear_power_news/archive/2013/06/26/obama-climate-plan-reiterates-support-for-nuclear-power_2c00_-smr-development-062601.aspx#.UgJF06wYP1w

I hope you're right. Accessing more fossil fuel isn't the solution to green-house gas emissions.

No true Republican would....

Rick, I'm glad you care about the world. You have children & I'm sure you want them to live in a healthy world with the resources needed to ensure their quality of life. Scientists want the same thing. Science isn't some vast conspiracy to drive up the price you pay for gasoline or to make you ride a bicycle to work.

Scientists are trained to think about long-term consequences. The long-term consequence of our current energy policy is a degraded ecosystem. The sort-term consequence of complying with the policies the scientists suggest will be painful. It still beats the alternative.

The new reactors are additions to current ones that have been in operation for years, and their licenses were requested before Obama took office.

However, the NRC during his tenure has since approved construction licenses despite Obama pandering for the 6 Nevada electoral votes by throwing support towards the anti-Yucca Mountain disposal unit crowd, pledging he would work to revoke those licenses during the 2012 campaign.

And since neither reactor will, at the ealiest, apply for operating licensure till 2018 and 2022 I can see why he changed his mind and is now all about Nuclear energy, which I'll admit I wasn't aware of. He see's no harm done with this move as he'll be long gone by then and he won't have to answer to Nevadans for going back on his promise.

http://nuclearstreet.com/nuclear_power_industry_news/b/nuclear_power_news/archive/2013/06/26/obama-climate-plan-reiterates-support-for-nuclear-power_2c00_-smr-development-062601.aspx#.UgJnqmS9LTp

And come on man, give me a break on the broad brush about Republicans and money. Both parties have people who would sell their mother's souls for money.

Rick

Edited August 7, 2013 by FirefightnRick

[FirefightnRick]

New report from NOAA - http://news.msn.com/science-technology/noaa-report-card-we-still-live-in-a-warming-world

On a related topic, Rush Limbaugh gives a young climate change denier a free ipad -

http://now.msn.com/rush-limbaugh-gives-ipad-to-boy-who-discounts-global-warming?ocid=msnnws

Yup, the Earth warms....and it also cools. Can't argue against that.

Rick

[UNTLifer]

Keystone: You know why Keystone isn't happening? Do you know that the Canadian oil is still being shipped to Houston? Do you know how? Railcar....Burlington Northen...Mr. Buffett's Burlington Nothern...the same Mr. Buffett that supports Obama.

As Rick stated, the earth cools and it warms. History has shown that to be the case. Back in the Ice Age, there was an Occupy Glacier movement by the Wooly Mammoths. They complained that the caveman was burning fuels, wood, to keep warm thus warming the earth. Looks like they were right.

[GTWT]

As Rick stated, the earth cools and it warms. History has shown that to be the case.

Yes, the earth cools & it warms. This case is a bit different though - the cause of the warming isn't increased vulcanism or a meteor strike, it's human activity

[JesseMartin]

My daughter is in all pre-AP classes in Lewisville. The issue of stewardship was discussed in science when the concept of global warming arose. The consensus among the students was that global warming with human activity as a factor was indeed possible, but it didn't matter because Jesus would return within three years anyway. The class agreed among themselves that this was the best answer, and the teacher nodded in agreement. My kid came home pretty frustrated that day.

Now, this isn't meant to say that a bunch of sixth graders should be an example in any of this, but it does, to me, reflect what their parents are teaching them, and their parents are the people voting and influencing activity or lack thereof.

See, that's just moronic and is a symptom of the same problem. What it boils down to is that there are quite a few groups that teach that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. My cousins went to some faith-based private or charter school out here, I think they graduated #1 and #2 or 3, and when they went to college they had no clue what was going on because they hadn't actually been taught anything (their words). My pastor's kid from when I was a teen is now a pastor too, and in a discussion he informed me that "all you need to know is in the Bible" (as to why he never studied world religions, literature, etc.). Using faith as an excuse to promote stupidity and a crutch to avoid forming any sort of original or rational thought isn't anywhere in the Bible. It's just a means by which to keep followers as easy to control as possible, and it's obviously working in many instances.

Edited August 7, 2013 by JesseMartin

[MeanGreenTexan]

Yes, the earth cools & it warms. This case is a bit different though - the cause of the warming isn't increased vulcanism or a meteor strike, it's human activity

If this is the case, and I can certainly be convinced that it is, we would need to see congruent evidence based on the population explosion after the industrial revolution. I think we can all agree that the earth's agrarian population prior to the IR was not really contributing much, if anything to warming/cooling.

Is there a trend that can correlate the two? If we're just seeing normal fluctuations of warming and cooling from about 1850-present, then there is more work to do because the evidence is still lacking.

[oldguystudent]

See, that's just moronic and is a symptom of the same problem. What it boils down to is that there are quite a few groups that teach that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. My cousins went to some faith-based private or charter school out here, I think they graduated #1 and #2 or 3, and when they went to college they had no clue what was going on because they hadn't actually been taught anything (their words). My pastor's kid from when I was a teen is now a pastor too, and in a discussion he informed me that "all you need to know is in the Bible" (as to why he never studied world religions, literature, etc.). Using faith as an excuse to promote stupidity and a crutch to avoid forming any sort of original or rational thought isn't anywhere in the Bible. It's just a means by which to keep followers as easy to control as possible, and it's obviously working in many instances.

I spent twelve years in private Christian school, the last four of which were at boarding school (which I dearly loved, to be honest). When I got to college, a state college with actual standards, I was woefully, horrendously unprepared. Got a whopping 1.67 GPA my first term, and had to work like a freaking banshee to just learn how to study, let alone understand the material that was presented to me.

Doesn't mean that all private Christian schools are inherently bad or that they all fail to prepare their students for the next level. My personal experience was of the "all you need to know is the bible" mentality, that all non-believers were actively trying to lure me into the depths of sin (boy, howdy did they succeed), and that all secular material was forbidden (I was not allowed to read novels). Imagine how my freshman Shakespeare class went. I understood nothing.

[Mean Green 93-98]

See, that's just moronic and is a symptom of the same problem. What it boils down to is that there are quite a few groups that teach that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. My cousins went to some faith-based private or charter school out here, I think they graduated #1 and #2 or 3, and when they went to college they had no clue what was going on because they hadn't actually been taught anything (their words). My pastor's kid from when I was a teen is now a pastor too, and in a discussion he informed me that "all you need to know is in the Bible" (as to why he never studied world religions, literature, etc.). Using faith as an excuse to promote stupidity and a crutch to avoid forming any sort of original or rational thought isn't anywhere in the Bible. It's just a means by which to keep followers as easy to control as possible, and it's obviously working in many instances.

I know numerous preachers, but none of them I personally know teaches that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. I have mostly heard that claim spouted by atheists and posters at gmg.com. It is sad to hear that there are those who claim to be Christians who help perpetuate false, shallow views of faith. The Bible certainly does not teach that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. Rather faith is, in part, a product, of reason. I do believe that the Bible is the most perfect source of knowledge one can find, but one has to go throught a process of reasoning before he can conclude that the Bible is reliable and authoritative.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Mean Green 93-98

[oldguystudent]

Faith: God exists.

Reason: The Earth is more than 6,000 years old.

Correct. There is no rule that these two concepts must oppose each other.

[forevereagle]

[oldguystudent]

[FirefightnRick]

Even before I read Rick's post that mentioned it, I was going to make this point. If you want ideological reasoning, here it is: God gave us stewardship over the planet that He created. Are we doing a good job of that? Per capita energy usage in the USA is higher than anywhere else, by a long shot. We also have more churches per capita, and those who attend them go more often than people in any other part of the world.

My point is that you can distrust the data from either side, but what is really troublesome is that the faithful appear to be less concerned with a responsibility bestowed by their Creator than they are with arguing against what they conceive to be a liberal agenda. I think that the divisions caused by the evolution vs. creation debate, and possibly the abortion issue, have caused a rift in the population of Christians to where they are more interested in siding with a political party against the "radical left" that sometimes supports scientific and/or medical means that are in opposition to their faith than they are in focusing on whether it might actually conflict with their faith. But instead of taking it on a case-by-case basis, many (not all, don't assume I'm calling out every conservative Christian but it is a large proportion) have flocked to the GOP's side over every issue without taking into consideration the fact that opposing what liberals laud may simply be a self-serving function of the party, and may be at odds with their spiritually-driven responsibilities.

I'm not trying to turn this into a religious debate, but wanted to point out that even if you do involve ideological standpoints, there is a compelling argument in favor of reducing our levels of pollution. And considering how many politicians run partially on the issue of faith, I find it more than a bit disturbing that so many opt to favor the "free market" over the application of spiritual ideals. He gave us dominion over the Earth and all its creatures, and we hope to be welcomed with, "Well done, my good and faithful servant," but there seems to be a disconnect in there for so many policies held close by many politicians, the companies they support, and the voters who continue to allow minimal restrictions and punishments for those who do great damage to ecological systems.

I try my best to avoid directly referencing spiritual concepts in favor of using conceptual imagery, and I think this is the first time I've mentioned anything specifically oriented to religion on this board. But again, even without scientific evidence (that has gotten stronger with the advancement of research tools and methods), there is a compelling faith-based argument that is alluded to (per Rick's previous post) but is rarely discussed in detail. And until voters who hold strongly to their Christian values begin to hold themselves, each other, and their elected representatives accountable, we aren't likely to see much of a political change regarding environmental issues until it becomes cost-effective for the companies who contribute to campaign funds to do so. The rest of the world may or may not follow suit, but the decision to be a responsible steward starts with each person, each community, and each electoral district first.

"Show me a man who rules his household well, and I'll show you a man fit to rule a kingdom." --Sophocles

Or leftism convincing Christians and even Jews to turn against their own faith...Nancy Pelosi for instance, a Catholic siding with leftism on Abortion and Gay rights.

Rick

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

--- Data indicates the world is getting slightly warmer... The largest indicator is ice disappearing and melting at poles and high elevations.. The entire argument is why??..... It might be natural and it might be caused by man ... no one is absolutely sure why ... but just in case maybe we should try to control what we can control...

---The warming likely will cause oceans to rise some... and weather to change.... and some places will get more rain or snow due to faster ocean evaporation and some places will get less and more heat.. Some supposedly experts claims storms will be more severe.. Might not want to buy a lot of land within a foot or so near sea level... the worse affected could be low elevation cities such as NYC that may have to construct seawalls to keep water back..

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Or leftism convincing Christians and even Jews to turn against their own faith...Nancy Pelosi for instance, a Catholic siding with leftism on Abortion and Gay rights.

Rick

--

So you think very young girls who have been raped or sexually abused should be forced to have that child... I've had them in class... I don't. I do oppose late term ones but in those cases where can they turn .... often it is a family member that did it..

Edited August 7, 2013 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[FirefightnRick]

--

So you think very young girls who have been raped or sexually abused should be forced to have that child...

No, I don't think this.

BTW...answer my question previously. Which oil company doesn't want the pipeline?

Rick

[JesseMartin]

I know numerous preachers, but none of them I personally know teaches that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. I have mostly heard that claim spouted by atheists and posters at gmg.com. It is sad to hear that there are those who claim to be Christians who help perpetuate false, shallow views of faith. The Bible certainly does not teach that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. Rather faith is, in part, a product, of reason. I do believe that the Bible is the most perfect source of knowledge one can find, but one has to go throught a process of reasoning before he can conclude that the Bible is reliable and authoritative.

This is kind of confusing, it sounds like you're saying that because you've been fortunate enough to have better experiences, that those who haven't are "perpetuating false, shallow views of faith". If that's the case, it's very bothersome. For people who have encountered problems and discuss them, including the need for change, to be accused of being the source of the problem is a pretty lame excuse. So I hope that I was reading your inferences wrong. I, too, have known some very good preachers along with the ones I referred to as part of "quite a few groups", and even they agree that there are problems with hypocrisy and poor leadership in our faith, and if asked would probably also note that they've seen similar instances of distancing faith from reason - from certain segments, not all.

Edited August 8, 2013 by JesseMartin

[Mean Green 93-98]

This is kind of confusing, it sounds like you're saying that because you've been fortunate enough to have better experiences, that those who haven't are "perpetuating false, shallow views of faith". If that's the case, it's very bothersome. For people who have encountered problems and discuss them, including the need for change, to be accused of being the source of the problem is a pretty lame excuse. So I hope that I was reading your inferences wrong. I, too, have known some very good preachers along with the ones I referred to as part of "quite a few groups", and even they agree that there are problems with hypocrisy and poor leadership in our faith, and if asked would probably also note that they've seen similar instances of distancing faith from reason - from certain segments, not all.

I'm not sure what you mean by "better experiences" . . . I don't recall saying anything about that. I said that those who claim that faith and reason are mutually exclusive perpetuate false, shallow views of faith. I'm sorry you find that bothersome, but it's the truth.

[JesseMartin]

Nope, I was asking if the way I rephrased/recapped it was what you meant. You just clarified, so we're on the same page.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

No, I don't think this.

BTW...answer my question previously. Which oil company doesn't want the pipeline?

Rick

I answered ... several independent producers... in the area have said this .... I am not sure these were the ones but BTA, CWEI, Henry Oil, and some others which I doubt you know of that are smaller producers and not retail people...These companies are worth 100's of millions so not really that small. I just don't remember which ones... Midland is an oil center and I don't remember which ones have been stating it... . About 20-25% of American oil comes from this area. Likely a lot of the producers oppose it because more oil available could mean a drop in oil prices ........ but that type of oil which would be transported is actually more expensive to refine...because it is considered very dirty...

There are a lot more .. but here is one:

Glen Perry, a petroleum engineer for Adira Energy, has warned that including the Alberta Clipper pipeline owned by TransCanada's competitor Enbridge, there is an extensive overcapacity of oil pipelines from Canada. After completion of the Keystone XL line, oil pipelines to the U.S. may run nearly half-empty. The expected lack of volume combined with extensive construction cost overruns has prompted several petroleum refining companies to sue TransCanada.

You don't hear much about northern Alaskan oil field anymore ... they are not producing enough to keep those pipelines "safe" from freezing... oil from there is expensive to drill and get to market... [ tough environment ] Don't hear much about opening drilling in the Gulf off Florida coast anymore.... why?? ..increased American mainland production. Unlike earlier, most oil used in America is now produced in America. In fact some companies including Valero exports gasoline to other countries. (supposedly about 10% of their production)

Read sources other than Fox. There are so many credible objections to it by those in the business. It just isn't needed at present plus the route is really the biggest objection other than environmentalist to that type of oil. ...READ real sources, not political ones. ... . Repeating a pipeline from here to the West coast was recently canceled ... almost did not even made the news.

So you are an expert on the oil industry too???

Are you aware of Kinder-Morgan Energy which cancelled this ... not a retail company....not small either.. owns 51,000 miles of pipelines.

http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/05/31/kinder-morgan-shelves-plans-for-texas-to-california-freedom-pipeline/

Edited August 8, 2013 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66