By: Fshhead , 6:19 AM GMT on February 22, 2007

This is my continuing blog on global warming. If you are new visitor, please look at last couple of blog entrys also on global warming!!!!

"There are so many arguments proving & disputing global warming that people can't seem to agree completly on it. But for all the preperations that we make for hurricanes & other disasters, what do we have to lose if we prepare for global warming as if the worst might come true?
The answer is pure common sense. We should try to eliminate the variables that cause global warming instead of just arguing about it. It's like a hurricane- if we prepare for the worst, it can only save lives & money. If it does not come, no one will have been hurt & we may even have a healthier Earth."

Book I recommend reading:

Videos I recommend:
"Who killed the electric car?"
HBO'S "To hot Not to handle"
"Inconvienent Truth"

Click Me!!!!

Click top of green box!!!!

Visitor Map
Create your own visitor map!

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Comments Limit Reached

This entry now contains the maximum number of comments and no more comments are allowed.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 101 - 51

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40Blog Index

101. Fshhead
8:44 PM GMT on March 04, 2007
Green group claims Honda environment call is irony
David Ornstein
March 5, 2007

Jenson Button's racing Honda.
Photo: AP

JENSON Button's formula one Honda will be responsible for emitting more than 50 tonnes of carbon dioxide this season, Friends of the Earth has claimed in the week the car maker launched the "Earth Car" as the centrepiece of its environmental-awareness campaign.

The car's emissions in the formula one season will probably be more than five times higher than the average British car produces in 12 months, Friends of the Earth says.

Englishman Button and his teammate Rubens Barrichello will race Honda's new RA107 and send about 500 kilograms of CO2 into the atmosphere on each of the 17 grand prix weekends, and about 17 tonnes by the end of the 2007 season.

The cars emit about 1500 grams of carbon dioxide a kilometre, which is almost nine times more than the amount of the average new road vehicle.

"There is some irony in the fact that Honda are attempting to promote the environment and calling on others to address environmental issues when they are contributing to climate change by participating in what is probably the most polluting sport on the planet," Friends of the Earth spokeswoman Emily Armistead said.

The F1 season requires Button and Barrichello to fly about 158,000 kilometres between their Monaco bases and the race circuits, producing a further 28.638 tonnes of CO2. Each driver will generate about 54.383 tonnes of the gas a year.

The figures exclude the flights made to test destinations and promotional events, the scooters used to get around circuits and the scores of team staff and hundreds of tonnes of equipment transported around the world.

Despite championing an environmental ethos, Honda concedes that it has yet to complete its calculations of its drivers' annual CO2 emissions.

The new vehicle, which features a huge image of the earth rather than commercial logos, has been described by the company as "a powerful call to action" to join "Honda's commitment to help address the environmental issues facing the world".

The man responsible for Honda Racing's new image is Simon Fuller, chief executive of 19 Entertainment and creator of Pop Idol, who was briefed to come up with a business model to attract sponsorship.

A spokesman for 19 Entertainment said the company had been given a "green audit" and had had consultations with Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace with Fuller professing a commitment to raising awareness of the environment


The Indy Racing League that I follow switched to ethanol last year. I thought that Formula 1 used methanol like the IRL did. Maybe you guys could shine some light on this?? Isn't methanol mostly alcohol?? I thought this burned very clean... I will have to do a little research on this.
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
100. Fshhead
8:32 PM GMT on March 04, 2007

DURKIN SAYS: Studies of gases in bubbles of air in polar ice sheets reveal that in prehistoric hot periods temperatures began rising before C02 levels. So increasing concentrations of the gas are the result, not the cause of global warming.

GORE SAYS: "It's a complicated relationship, but the most important part of it is this: when there is more C02 in the atmosphere, the temperature increases." He shows two graphs of rising temperature and C02 levels over the past 600,000 years and says they "fit together".

WE SAY: Temperature and C02 are bound together. When one goes up, the other will follow. In prehistory temperatures often started rising 800 years before levels of the gas, and Gore evades this point. But it is irrelevant to what is happening now, because for the first time ever enormous amounts of extra C02 are being released.

The Arctic

DURKIN SAYS: Recent reports of how the amount of ice in the Arctic is shrinking have been exaggerated. The Arctic has always contracted and expanded over history.

GORE SAYS: The Arctic is a "canary in the coal mine". Since the 1970s ,the extent and thickness of its ice cap has "diminished precipitously". If we continue as we are, it will disappear during summers, profoundly changing the climate.

WE SAY: The amount of the ice ebbs and flows with natural warmings and coolings of the climate, and part of this shrinking is probably due to that. But this is being increased by global warming caused by rising levels of greenhouse gases, and these continue to go up. The Arctic is likely to be free of ice by 2050, for the first time in millions of years.

The sun

DURKIN SAYS: The sun is the main cause of global warming. The sun's activity increases from time to time, with increased solar flares, cutting down on cloud formation and raising temperatures on Earth. This activity correlates well with warmer periods over the past several hundred years.

GORE SAYS: The culprit is humanity's emissions of "huge quantities" of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which trap more of the infrared radiation of the sun that would otherwise escape out into space.

WE SAY: Variations in solar activity may have been responsible for past warm periods, though it's hard to be entirely sure because we have been taking good measurements of it only since 1978. But recent solar increases are too small to have produced the present warming, and have been much less important than greenhouse gases since about 1850.

Hmmmm not sure who the "WE" is........
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
98. Fshhead
8:29 PM GMT on March 04, 2007
Standing with Dominic Lawson on the sceptic's barricades are his father (or to give him proper deference, Lord Lawson of Blaby) and his brother-in-law Christopher Monckton, Lord Monckton of Brenchley. Surprisingly, there is much common ground between sceptics and the environmentalists. Lord Lawson, for example, says that there is "little doubt that the 20th century ended warmer than it began".

He adds, similarly, that "there is no doubt that atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide increased greatly" during it.

He even agrees that it is "highly likely that carbon dioxide emissions" have played a significant part" in heating up the Earth.

At least he admits that. Hmmm 2 plus 2 is what?
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
97. Fshhead
8:27 PM GMT on March 04, 2007
Thanx Rand I saved the link, I do want to see it for sure. It's going to be interesting to see what Gore starts saying when it gets out. Bet he screws up again lol
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
96. Fshhead
8:23 PM GMT on March 04, 2007
Tidbits I picked up already on the guy who is making that documentary...

Martin Durkin, for his part, achieved notoriety when his previous series on the environment for the channel, called Against Nature , was roundly condemned by the Independent Television Commission for misleading contributors on the purpose of the programmes, and for editing four interviewees in a way that "distorted or mispresented their known views".

Channel 4 was forced to issue a humiliating apology. But it seems to have forgiven Mr Durkin and sees no need to make special checks on the accuracy of the programme. For his part, the film-maker accepts the charge of misleading contributors, but describes the verdict of distortion as "complete tosh."

His programme uncovers no startling new information, any more than does Mr Gore's film. The documentary repeats many of the arguments put in Britain by, among others what appears to be be something of a family cottage industry.

BTW... the article also bashes Gore lol. See this is why I always say Gore is an idiot. He has the right idea but, he always seems to screw up lol.
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
93. Fshhead
8:12 PM GMT on March 04, 2007
The programme claims efforts to reduce CO2 are killing Africans, who have to burn fires inside their home, causing cancer and lung damage, because their governments are being encouraged to use wind and solar panels that are not capable of supplying the continent with electricity, instead of coal and oil-burning power stations that could.
That would be flaw #1. Why are they burning fires in their homes?? People in the world have being doing this for centuries & still do. Makes me wonder what are they burning & if the smoke is exhausted right etc...
Also this where I heard (South Africa) that they developed new solar film that shows great promise. This is supposed to be implemented into alot of homes there I think later this year.
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
92. Fshhead
8:05 PM GMT on March 04, 2007
STL, thats the advice I gave them when I 1st started hearing about the problem.
Randrewl my friend....
Happy belated birthday to ya Pop's lol. Yes you really need to see that movie. I would really like to hear your thoughts on it. Thanx for the article, pretty interesting.Like I have said before I hope I am wrong along with all the scientists when it comes to GW. I do like to see stuff like that. I really want to see that show but, I think its in Britain. I am sure somehow it will get over here. Personally I see some flaws in the article that makes me wonder if this is someone who took money from the oil companies. Let us not forget this WAS occuring.
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
89. Fshhead
7:45 PM GMT on March 04, 2007
LowerCal, I did take out some graphics last nite. If the problem continues I will check in with Aaron to see what the problem is....
Yes, "Who killed the electric car" should be on the list of movies to see. I will say it again, I think alot of people will be shocked!!
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
87. LowerCal
2:48 AM PST on March 04, 2007
Hmm, only 177Kb of graphics in the blog entry which should only be a slight pause for the dialups. Must be something else. Maybe Aaron would have an idea.

"Who Killed the Electric Car" is on my list to see now.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
86. Fshhead
9:07 AM GMT on March 04, 2007
Yea I have been hearing alot about that lately. I will try to cut down on graphics to help y'all. Doesn't getreal have pics in his blog??? You seem to be able to go there....
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
85. snowboy
8:48 AM GMT on March 04, 2007
ethanol is not the way to go..

by the way Fsh, one reason folks are out of this blog for global warming discussions is it takes too long to load for us dial up folks - wasn't always like this..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
84. snowboy
8:48 AM GMT on March 04, 2007
ethanol is not the way to go..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
83. Fshhead
8:30 AM GMT on March 04, 2007
Skye, PLEASE tell everyone you know to watch this movie. If everyone were to watch this movie then do the research on the Tesla, I think they would be really shocked. I don't think people realize how far the electric car has come, once again like I always point out they did it with small amounts of money thrown at it.
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
82. Fshhead
8:22 AM GMT on March 04, 2007
Finally....... I posted many many times about "Who killed the electric car". Like I said before after I watched that movie I got real pissed. UNBELIEVABLE how they handled it. As I said before I HIGHLY recommend for everyone to see this movie!! You also have to watch all the extra features, more unbelievable stuff!! Like I have said many times.... The technology is here, the time is now!!!!
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
81. Skyepony (Mod)
5:28 AM GMT on March 04, 2007
I watched the movie "who killed the electric car" tonight. Highly recommend it, it's available to rent. I wasn't aware of the very long history of the electric car. & how less efficent, easy, affordable, clean hydrogen is compared to electric.

U.S. Projects 19 Percent Emissions Rise by 2020

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
80. sp34n119w
10:22 AM PST on March 02, 2007
Ethanol for energy independence? Not the way the current administration plans to do it. Does it make sense to go from being energy dependent on the Middle East to being energy dependent on South America?
U.S. and Brazilian officials are negotiating details of an ethanol partnership in advance of President Bush's scheduled visit to Brazil next week.
The problems with ethanol are many and varied. This is one of them, imo.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
78. Fshhead
7:16 AM GMT on March 01, 2007
Climate Expert Urges China, US to Talk on Warming

UK: March 3, 2007

LONDON - China and the United States, key to tackling the climate crisis, are both acting on global warming and must start giving each other credit for it, former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern said on Tuesday.

Stern, who produced a seminal report last October on the economics of climate change, said the two countries -- one the world's biggest polluter and the other fast rising up the scale -- had to open their eyes and start talking to each other.
"The United States is moving," Stern told an audience of bankers, politicians and business people at a Reuters Newsmaker event. "And China is moving."

"If the United States will recognise that China is moving and if China will recognise that the United States is moving ... then you can have that kind of discussion," he said, urging more speed from both sides.

The United States rejected the Kyoto Protocol -- the only global action plan to combat global warming -- saying it would be economic suicide. China, which is building one coal-fired power plant a week, is not bound by it.

Intensive diplomatic discussions are under way to try to find a successor to Kyoto, which expires in 2012, and to extend its scope and membership.

But President George W. Bush refuses to have any part in a new treaty that does not include the major developing nations. They, in turn, refuse to commit to serious greenhouse gas emission cuts unless the US does likewise.


"We shouldn't underestimate the resentment that India and China and the other developing countries feel on this issue," Stern said. "They say 'you guys stuck it all up there ... and now you are asking us to solve your problems'".

Stern, who has worked extensively in both China and India and who has just returned from the United States, noted that US cities, states and businesses were already taking action regardless of the view from the White House.

He noted seven or eight states were setting up a system to cap carbon emissions and trade emission permits, and many cities and businesses had committed themselves to strong greenhouse gas emission reductions.

Likewise, China was reforesting, had set tough targets on energy efficiency and was taxing gas guzzling vehicles.

"In India and China I spend a lot of time pointing out that the United States ... is actually doing quite a lot," he said.

"When I am in the United States I try to point out what China is doing."

Leading scientists predict average world temperatures will rise by 1.8 to 4.0 degrees Celsius this century due mainly to carbon gases from burning fossil fuels for power and transport.

Stern said the world was already on course for a rise of two degrees Celsius and would pass through three degrees with massive loss of life unless urgent action was taken.
Story by Jeremy Lovell


I don't understand the current administration. They will not talk to anybody. Seems to me if you are talking to the people maybe everyone would understand each other better & usually you can tell if people are lying lol So what is the harm talking to them?????????
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
77. Fshhead
6:42 AM GMT on March 01, 2007
First wave power plant ready to roll
Rob Taylor

March 01, 2007 12:00

AUSTRALIA'S cities are drought-parched and its desert outback drenched by floods, but climate change has not yet killed the country's famed surf beaches, or their promise of clean eco-power.

Australia's first commercial wave-generated power station will in weeks begin supplying homes south of Sydney with electricity and fresh drinking water, courtesy of the sea.

"The energy in waves is the densest of any natural sources of energy. It's pretty much always there and it doesn't go away like sun and wind do," John Bell, the chief finance officer from station developer Energetech said.

Lying anchored just 100m off a popular surf beach near Wollongong, south of Sydney, the 485-tonne plant will power 500 homes along the local grid.

Electricity is generated when waves wash into a funnel facing the ocean, driving air through a pipe and into a turbine capable of pumping 500kw of clean power each day into the local grid.

The $6m floating plant, built to withstand a one in 100-year storm, can also desalinate 2000 litres of drinking water each day for almost as many homes as it powers.

The station is also popular with local surfers, having created a nearby sandbar with a small surf break, despite the difficulty of getting to it from Port Kembla's port.

Mr Bell said the plant was the prototype for a larger installation of 10 stations to be built on the wave-battered southern Australian coast near Portland, in Victoria.

"We'll have a queue to roll these things out, because the fact we can do both electrical energy and desalinated water is quite compelling," he said.

Interest in building similar plants has come from Hawaii, Spain, South Africa, Mexico, Chile and both US coasts, with Energetech having just completed a round of venture capital raising, mainly in Europe.

"Our production units will be producing one million litres of water each day and we can produce at very low cost," Mr Bell said.

The costs of power from the plant ranged below 10 cents per kW of electricity and under $1 per 1000 litres of water.

The Portland plants, floating like an ocean-bound wind farm, would produce 10MW, enough for around 15,000 homes.

The turbine at the heart of the station employs new techology which allows it to spin in the same direction, irrespective of wind direction in the tunnel.

"We believe its got the best chance of any of those natural sources to get close to, or we believe get below, the cost of fossil fuel," Mr Bell said

I gotta say I kinda hesitated to post this. Here we go with the tunnels lol. I dont think it is like Busters idea though. One thing I will have to check up on is somebody DID construct some tunnels somewhere in the Bahamas or Barbados. Cant remember exactly where. It would be interesting to see if they work. I know Buster has taken ALOT of heat for his ideas. You guys always tell him it won't work. To me it seemed like something that maybe could work, at least as far as producing power.
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
76. Fshhead
8:14 PM GMT on February 28, 2007
Hmmmm Now here is an interesting idea for power! Dont think we would run out of the fuel either lol. Way too long to post,left the link to site instead!
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
73. thunder1
2:18 PM GMT on February 28, 2007
72. thunder1
2:10 PM GMT on February 28, 2007
Hey everyone, whats up?
FSHHEAD I notice you had an unwelcome visitor on DR. JEFFS blog yesterday,lol
I stopped chating for awhile, that childlessness totally got under my skin.
I must just be getting old, lol
How is it going in Florida?
71. thunder1
1:56 PM GMT on February 28, 2007
Whats up everyone ?
Hey FSHHEAD, I notice you guys had an unwelcome visitor on DR. JEFFS blog recently.
I stopped chatting for a few years for that.
Its so childish. Thats what drew me to this site, it seems for the most part people that can hold a mature debate.Hows it going in Florida?
70. Fshhead
11:24 AM GMT on February 28, 2007
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
69. Fshhead
11:19 AM GMT on February 28, 2007
Yea Snow, walked to close to the bridge last nite myself,A Troll came out & tried to attack Ack!
I pretty much betting he came out for a cameo appearance today considering you say he got banned so quickly lol.
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
68. Fshhead
11:16 AM GMT on February 28, 2007
Thunder its going well lol
As far as me being knowledgable I owe ALOT of credit to the usual round of suspects that frequent my blog!!!!!!! I get alot of knowledge from them & when skeptics try to challenge what we find it gets me looking & researching even more. We have found ALOT of data & info & I think we are pretty convinced(along with the huge numbers of scientists & researchers).
As far as the Tesla lol that would be what all the little pics of it are. Just click the pic & it takes you right to the site......

CLICK ME CLICK ME!!!!!!!!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
67. snowboy
4:56 AM GMT on February 28, 2007
hey Fshhead, considerable debate on the global warming issue on the Masters' blog today (including the fastest vapourization of a troll by Admin that I've ever seen)..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
66. thunder1
10:15 PM GMT on February 27, 2007
Hey FSHHEAD, hows it going?
You seem to be very knowledgeable of several topics. If you have any info. on the Tesla,
or somewhere I can research it, I would appreciate it.
It seems there is a small trend starting where people are beginning to take things in their own hands in taking it to the next level. I guess people are getting tired of waiting for our leaders to actually do something.
Our leaders on either side spend way to much time debateing rather than acting. I guess that makes sense,then nothing gets done and there is no one to blame,lol.
65. Fshhead
8:04 PM GMT on February 27, 2007
Great topic again FISHEAD.Im in your shoes, I would love to do anything I can to make this a better planet, But I cannot afford the technology. Its funny how were are told how we should live and how bad we are for lets say driving SUV's, but this new technology far exceedes most of societies income.Our leaders are making far to much money right now with the current system in place. Until our leaders stop taking payoffs or until we can somehow get someone in place that will actually do the right thing Im afraid were heading down a one way dead end street.

Thunder, I think that Tesla is starting the revolution for us. I cannot stress enough what this car is going to do!!! I personally think it is going to be a HUGE success. When everyone starts seeing these cars & the word really gets out that is about the time the next model "Whitestar" will go into production. This car "starts" getting into the affordable range. By this time they "should" be ready for the next model which in turn will be even cheaper & I am sure more efficient. I have watched this company start from a dream to really becoming a reality. Now like I have pointed out they are putting a plant in New Mexico which just happens to be the state Bill Richardson, presidential candidate, former energy secretary,resides over. This man sees something with this company. I think they are going to have a good relationship & you know what?? If he does just happen to slip into the White House the skies the limit!!!!!!
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
63. Madrid
3:03 PM GMT on February 27, 2007
I welcome you again, Thunder and thank you for you post.
No, you didn't offended me and I didn't take personally. I know, though that a lot of people have a believe that scientists are bought my money and politics and I wanted to clarify since I am in that world and see what really happens. My point is that science is a world of humans and humans come in all flavors. The majority of the scientist fight for their ideas at the same time as funding. Only scientists that work for private companies are under the gun to get results for what the company wants; it is business and that is where we have to be more carefull.
Again, sincerely welcome to the bloggs.
I need to leave for the university and can't continue posting now, but will talk to you guys later.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
62. thunder1
2:27 PM GMT on February 27, 2007
Hi again people, How is everyone on this fine day? Thanks for the welcome FSHHEAD and MADRID!
MADRID, sorry if my statement offended you, it was not my intention if I did. It was just a statement to set an example. .I was referring to all the people sitting on the top.
It all starts with the corruption of our leadership. I complement you on your hard work to get where you are now. My fiancee is a author as well,so the best of luck with your book. Let me know how to get one.Thats another rough career chasing down the publishing company to get paid,lol.
Great topic again FISHEAD.Im in your shoes, I would love to do anything I can to make this a better planet, But I cannot afford the technology. Its funny how were are told how we should live and how bad we are for lets say driving SUV's, but this new technology far exceedes most of societies income.Our leaders are making far to much money right now with the current system in place. Until our leaders stop taking payoffs or until we can somehow get someone in place that will actually do the right thing Im afraid were heading down a one way dead end street.
61. Fshhead
9:32 AM GMT on February 27, 2007
Feb. 26, 2007, 12:02PM
Top scientist wants halt on new coal power plants

Associated Press

WASHINGTON One of the world's top scientists on global warming called for the United States to stop building coal-fired power plants and eventually bulldoze older generators that don't capture and bury greenhouse gases.

But 159 coal-fired power plants are scheduled to be built in the next decade or so, generating enough power for about 96 million homes, according to a study last month by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Burning coal is one of the major sources of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas causing global warming.

In prepared remarks to be delivered at the National Press Club Monday afternoon, NASA scientist James Hansen, who has been one of the earliest top researchers to warn the world about global warming, will call for a moratorium on building new coal-fired power plants.

Hansen's call dovetails with an edict by the private equity group buying TXU, a massive Texas-based utility. The equity group, led by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. and Texas Pacific Group, agreed to stop plans to build eight new coal-fired power plants, not to propose new coal-fired plants outside Texas and to support mandatory national caps on emissions linked to global warming.

Hansen's presentation to the press club says all coal-fired power plants that do not capture and bury carbon dioxide "must eventually be bulldozed (before mid-century)."

The director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, who was speaking as a private citizen, said Congress should adopt these coal cuts and if not, "citizens must accomplish this." He said increased efficiency can make up for the cutbacks in coal.

Coal provides about half of the United States' electricity, according to the Department of Energy.

Hansen's call "ought to be vetted by those who have an understanding of the energy demands placed on the U.S. economy," said National Mining Association spokesman Luke Popovich. "When seen in light of those demands, then statements like that will appear unreasonable, to put it charitably."

Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
58. cyclonebuster
5:14 AM GMT on February 27, 2007
Funny they don't mention that Al Gores house is most likely 20 times bigger than the average househould either??? Why they bashing him?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
57. cyclonebuster
5:08 AM GMT on February 27, 2007

Problem cured!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
56. Madrid
4:59 AM GMT on February 27, 2007
Hi Fshhead. Thank you for your welcome. I will have to do my comments in little stalls, which I don't like. The problem now is that I have to defend my work before April and I am writing a book on it before defending it. That's why I am a little reluctant to get in long debates since there is so much to say and so many corners to look at.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
55. Fshhead
4:55 AM GMT on February 27, 2007
Madrid welcome & I look forward to your comments!!!
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
54. Madrid
4:35 AM GMT on February 27, 2007
Hello, everybody. Welcome Thunder1. Great topic, Fshhead. Congratulations from a SCIENTIST. This debate is one of those that I really enjoy, like any deep conversation. However, I won't comment on my opinion yet, but I do have to on the scientist statement.

Also, alot of scientists have a passion in the field and try to do the right thing and make a difference, but alot of scientists are bought, have their own agenda, or trying to seek more funding. I am not trying to degrade scientists, but alot of what scientists do involves politics. As we all know or should,
it is that politics is corruption, scandels,
power, greed and wealth, and that we are mislead and lied to on a daily basis.

At all levels of society, in all jobs, in all races, there are corrupted and honest people. Scientists are not different, but no one realize that scientists get in science for pure passion of it. If you guys read articles about what worst jobs with a college degree are salary wise, number 1 is scientist. First, 4 years of college, and then an average of 6 years of PhD just to get out as a postdoc (scientist jargon) with the base salary. And that was only regulated two years ago. Politics, yes, it's a lot of politics, but to get normally to what we are interested in studying and using the politics to get money for it. My field is biomedical research, but I assure guys that the rest of the fields are in the same shape. Don't believe everything that scientist say, no. But don't do it because we are corrupted, do it because it is a field of years of painstakingly work to look at one facet of the million there are to look at, mostly by hypothesis of things that are not tangable and with techniques that are far from perfect, and in return just get peanuts. I'll continue this exciting topic when I get my next step, so I can get a few dollars more than what I am getting now, $20,000 a year --no limit on hours, no overtime pay allowed.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
53. Fshhead
3:25 AM GMT on February 27, 2007
Posted By: Alaskaman40 at 8:39 PM GMT on February 26, 2007.

Good My goal has been achieved. So you finally swallowed the the bait Mr Global warming. LMAO
So i take it that you ride a bicycle and heat your house with wood stoves , which also produces Co2 emmisons. Oh electric cars??? well short of a solar arrays spanning an entire desert, what fuels are consumed to generate the electricity for electric cars gas fired plants, coal? Tired of all these car driving morons complaining of emmisons.
Posted By: Fshhead at 3:15 AM GMT on February 27, 2007.

Well Alaska 1st of all you did not have to "bait" me to talk to me & to get me to respond lol, you just could have posted in my blog but whatever o.k. If you had taken the time to read through alot of it ahhh my view is that the WHOLE energy industry needs to be changed. This "moron" thinks that it should be largely solar generated so it rather takes care of your coal statement.Also if you had read through the blog you would have seen that yes I drive a gasoline powered vehicle. I am not wealthy by any means & this proves to be a hindrance you know?? My vehicle is flex-fuel though & this I have touted as the very least we should be doing right now. Trust me if I WAS a wealthy person you can bet I would be driving an electric car being run off solar panels generating power for the house & the car. Also once again if you had read through the blog you would have seen all the reasons that we really need energy independence. If you cannot see these reasons why the swich needs to be made then it's back to that nifty little Unocal logo.......
Really looking forward to the coming debate with ya lol
Mr. Global warming

Case in point lol!!!!!! Taken from Alaskamans blog.
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
52. Fshhead
3:17 AM GMT on February 27, 2007
Thunder Thanx for the nice compliments & welcome to Weather Underground. Ahhhh as far as the intellectual debate, I will give ya fair warning it does get out of hand sometimes but, I guess everyone really feels passionate about wichever side of the debate they are on.
Feel free to comment anytime just be ready to take a little "heat" for it from time to time lol
Member Since: November 19, 2005 Posts: 9 Comments: 9960
51. thunder1
9:45 PM GMT on February 26, 2007
Hi Everybody,
How is everyone? I am a new member to this website and I think it is totally cool. Actually a site where you can have a intellectual debate. I like to thank everyone for the awesome photos taken,its a way to escape and relax.
FSHHEAD,I like to compliment you on your awesome blog and your attempts to get others more involved in reaching our elected offcials on our many events. This is a tough subject and everyone has their own views. I sit in the middle leaning more towards FSHHEADS view. I am not a scientist nor have education in Global Warming. I do follow politics and world events,actually more than I care to,lol.
Let me start off with a few arguements that show that man does have an effect on Global Warming.
In my town like many others,when we get an overabundance of rain,our sewer plants shoot millions of gallons of waste in our lakes.You can see thousands of dead fish floating on top of the water,and thats only the damage we see. Then they tell us according to your age or gender the amount of fish safe to eat per week from that lake.
Second, The continuious construction of residental and commercial building all around the country is eating away at our grasslands and forests, elimating slowly the oxygen we need to survive. We are also taking away the land of our wildlife, or the process in which they live.Therefore alot of living animals are dying off.
I realize these topics have nothing to do with Global Warming, but to point out that man has alot to do with the process in which things occur. If man can change or disrupt the process
in one way its obvious everything man does at the very least has an effect on the natural process.
I do agree that the planet has a natural process in which it evolves, but by the pollution, chemicals and waste that we contaminate our planet with, it does affect or
disrupt the natural process.
Also, alot of scientists have a passion in the field and try to do the right thing and make a difference, but alot of scientists are bought, have their own agenda, or trying to seek more funding. I am not trying to degrade scientists, but alot of what scientists do involves politics. As we all know or should,
it is that politics is corruption, scandels,
power, greed and wealth, and that we are mislead and lied to on a daily basis.
Thanks,nice to meet all of you

Viewing: 101 - 51

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40Blog Index

Top of Page

Fshhead's WunderBlog

About Fshhead

Local Weather

Partly Cloudy
73 °F
Partly Cloudy

Fshhead's Recent Photos

Hurricane Andrew August 24, 1992
Hurricane Andrew August 24, 1992
Hurricane Andrew August 24, 1992
Hurricane Andrew August 24, 1992