<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NPR&#8217;s debate on global warming</title>
	<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/</link>
	<description>Grand Junction, Colorado's community Web site, discussions, forums, message boards and more.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 16:23:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1554</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 04:55:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1554</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;High Gas Prices?...&lt;/strong&gt;

Make your money you spend on Gasoline go Farther Click Here!  To see how....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>High Gas Prices?&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Make your money you spend on Gasoline go Farther Click Here!  To see how&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: toaaronuu</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1291</link>
		<dc:creator>toaaronuu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:52:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1291</guid>
		<description>Yes, with the usual exception this has been an interesting conversation. I'm still of the mind that the most important thing with this issue is to make it clear there is no debate. The time for debating is over. Now, will the free market help us realize the necessary changes, or not? What choices do we as individuals make in the next 8 months to secure our happy and healthy future?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, with the usual exception this has been an interesting conversation. I&#8217;m still of the mind that the most important thing with this issue is to make it clear there is no debate. The time for debating is over. Now, will the free market help us realize the necessary changes, or not? What choices do we as individuals make in the next 8 months to secure our happy and healthy future?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Willis_Leon_Johnson</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1268</link>
		<dc:creator>Willis_Leon_Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 03:13:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1268</guid>
		<description>Awwww, golly gee...

One of the three stooges came up with;

"Nigel_Spumoni
Posted April 23rd, 2008 at 6:46 pm  Login to Send PM  Report this comment  

Oh - and some facts for Willis (way back in Post #34) on the original topic of this thread. You know, skewed data collected with biased, complex instruments like thermometers &#38; weather balloons."

So, stop using skewed data.

Use real, scientifically collected data that even the lesser descendants of apes can understand.

My data is accurate.  Stop lying to bolster your argument and act like an adult.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Awwww, golly gee&#8230;</p>
<p>One of the three stooges came up with;</p>
<p>&#8220;Nigel_Spumoni<br />
Posted April 23rd, 2008 at 6:46 pm  Login to Send PM  Report this comment  </p>
<p>Oh - and some facts for Willis (way back in Post #34) on the original topic of this thread. You know, skewed data collected with biased, complex instruments like thermometers &amp; weather balloons.&#8221;</p>
<p>So, stop using skewed data.</p>
<p>Use real, scientifically collected data that even the lesser descendants of apes can understand.</p>
<p>My data is accurate.  Stop lying to bolster your argument and act like an adult.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John B.</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1265</link>
		<dc:creator>John B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 01:28:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1265</guid>
		<description>Now, that's the way to have an intelligent dialog on this medium. As long as all non-profane, non-threatening letters to the Sentinel are published in this space they should be limited to this kind of comments/dialog instead of a free-for-all entertainment gotcha contest. You are all to be congratulated, or most all of you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now, that&#8217;s the way to have an intelligent dialog on this medium. As long as all non-profane, non-threatening letters to the Sentinel are published in this space they should be limited to this kind of comments/dialog instead of a free-for-all entertainment gotcha contest. You are all to be congratulated, or most all of you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel_Spumoni</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1264</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel_Spumoni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 01:03:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1264</guid>
		<description>Now you're talking my language, bullishfrog. Do youself a favor and read "Plan B 3.0 - Mobilizing to Save Civilization" (by Lester Brown). Download free online as a .PDF. Chock full of grim statistics &#38; viable solutions, such as this tasty morsel on gas taxes:

"For a gasoline tax, the most detailed analysis available of
indirect costs is found in The Real Price of Gasoline by the
International Center for Technology Assessment. The many
indirect costs to society—including climate change, oil industry
tax breaks, oil supply protection, oil industry subsidies, and
treatment of auto exhaust-related respiratory illnesses—total
around $12 per gallon ($3.17 per liter), slightly more than the
cost to society of smoking a pack of cigarettes. If this external
or social cost is added to the roughly $3 per gallon average price
of gas in the United States in early 2007, gas would cost $15 a
gallon. These are real costs. Someone bears them. If not us, our
children. Now that these costs have been calculated, they can be
used to set tax rates on gasoline, just as the CDC analysis is
being used to raise taxes on cigarettes."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now you&#8217;re talking my language, bullishfrog. Do youself a favor and read &#8220;Plan B 3.0 - Mobilizing to Save Civilization&#8221; (by Lester Brown). Download free online as a .PDF. Chock full of grim statistics &amp; viable solutions, such as this tasty morsel on gas taxes:</p>
<p>&#8220;For a gasoline tax, the most detailed analysis available of<br />
indirect costs is found in The Real Price of Gasoline by the<br />
International Center for Technology Assessment. The many<br />
indirect costs to society—including climate change, oil industry<br />
tax breaks, oil supply protection, oil industry subsidies, and<br />
treatment of auto exhaust-related respiratory illnesses—total<br />
around $12 per gallon ($3.17 per liter), slightly more than the<br />
cost to society of smoking a pack of cigarettes. If this external<br />
or social cost is added to the roughly $3 per gallon average price<br />
of gas in the United States in early 2007, gas would cost $15 a<br />
gallon. These are real costs. Someone bears them. If not us, our<br />
children. Now that these costs have been calculated, they can be<br />
used to set tax rates on gasoline, just as the CDC analysis is<br />
being used to raise taxes on cigarettes.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bullishfrog</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1263</link>
		<dc:creator>bullishfrog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1263</guid>
		<description>It can go from California to anywhere in the country where it can be processed. We have a big pipeline system in the continental US. It takes a number of years to get production started.  We need it now.  I would also be in favor of raising gasoline taxes, over time, to reach European levels.  That would reduce consumption.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It can go from California to anywhere in the country where it can be processed. We have a big pipeline system in the continental US. It takes a number of years to get production started.  We need it now.  I would also be in favor of raising gasoline taxes, over time, to reach European levels.  That would reduce consumption.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel_Spumoni</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1262</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel_Spumoni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:46:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1262</guid>
		<description>Oh - and some facts for Willis (way back in Post #34) on the original topic of this thread. You know, skewed data collected with biased, complex instruments like thermometers &#38; weather balloons. Mull it over while enjoying your TV dinner:

 1.	Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.74°C (plus or minus 0.18°C) since the late-19th century, and the linear trend for the past 50 years of 0.13°C (plus or minus 0.03°C) per decade is nearly twice that for the past 100 years. The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S. and parts of the North Atlantic) have, in fact, cooled slightly over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Lastly, seven of the eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001 and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995. (NOAA)

2.	Climatologists at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City have found that 2007 tied with 1998 for Earth's second warmest year in a century.  (NASA)

3.	Global mean sea level has been rising at an average rate of 1.7 mm/year (plus or minus 0.5mm) over the past 100 years, which is significantly larger than the rate averaged over the last several thousand years. (NOAA)

4.	Pre-industrial levels of carbon dioxide (prior to the start of the Industrial Revolution) were about 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv), and current levels are greater than 380 ppmv and increasing at a rate of 1.9 ppm yr-1 since 2000. The global concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere today far exceeds the natural range over the last 650,000 years of 180 to 300 ppmv. According to the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), by the end of the 21st century, we could expect to see carbon dioxide concentrations of anywhere from 490 to 1260 ppm (75-350% above the pre-industrial concentration). (NOAA)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh - and some facts for Willis (way back in Post #34) on the original topic of this thread. You know, skewed data collected with biased, complex instruments like thermometers &amp; weather balloons. Mull it over while enjoying your TV dinner:</p>
<p> 1.	Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.74°C (plus or minus 0.18°C) since the late-19th century, and the linear trend for the past 50 years of 0.13°C (plus or minus 0.03°C) per decade is nearly twice that for the past 100 years. The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S. and parts of the North Atlantic) have, in fact, cooled slightly over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Lastly, seven of the eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001 and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995. (NOAA)</p>
<p>2.	Climatologists at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City have found that 2007 tied with 1998 for Earth&#8217;s second warmest year in a century.  (NASA)</p>
<p>3.	Global mean sea level has been rising at an average rate of 1.7 mm/year (plus or minus 0.5mm) over the past 100 years, which is significantly larger than the rate averaged over the last several thousand years. (NOAA)</p>
<p>4.	Pre-industrial levels of carbon dioxide (prior to the start of the Industrial Revolution) were about 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv), and current levels are greater than 380 ppmv and increasing at a rate of 1.9 ppm yr-1 since 2000. The global concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere today far exceeds the natural range over the last 650,000 years of 180 to 300 ppmv. According to the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), by the end of the 21st century, we could expect to see carbon dioxide concentrations of anywhere from 490 to 1260 ppm (75-350% above the pre-industrial concentration). (NOAA)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel_Spumoni</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1261</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel_Spumoni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1261</guid>
		<description>300,000 bbl/day to MAYBE 1.5 million bbl/day MAX are the real numbers (+ some natural gas to boot). So, what to do - stick it in the pipeline to only feed Cailfonia's daily car addiction? Or, leave it in the ground so we have some backup?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>300,000 bbl/day to MAYBE 1.5 million bbl/day MAX are the real numbers (+ some natural gas to boot). So, what to do - stick it in the pipeline to only feed Cailfonia&#8217;s daily car addiction? Or, leave it in the ground so we have some backup?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bullishfrog</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1260</link>
		<dc:creator>bullishfrog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:37:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1260</guid>
		<description>Based on what I read in a government report, the Anwar field would produce at 1.6 million barrels per day for 20 years. That is supposed to be a conservative estimate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Based on what I read in a government report, the Anwar field would produce at 1.6 million barrels per day for 20 years. That is supposed to be a conservative estimate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel_Spumoni</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1259</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel_Spumoni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:36:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/04/22/nprs-debate-on-global-warming/#comment-1259</guid>
		<description>Nuclear energy doesn't even have a seat at the table - if only we would wake up and stop lying to ourselves about TRUE costs and externalities, such as requiring utilities:

-To absorb the costs of nuclear waste disposal 
-To decommission plants when worn out
-To insure reactors against possible accidents and terrorist attacks

Bottom line: building new nuclear plants in a competitive electricity market (one that includes wind, solar, geothermal, ocean energy, etc.) is simply not economical.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nuclear energy doesn&#8217;t even have a seat at the table - if only we would wake up and stop lying to ourselves about TRUE costs and externalities, such as requiring utilities:</p>
<p>-To absorb the costs of nuclear waste disposal<br />
-To decommission plants when worn out<br />
-To insure reactors against possible accidents and terrorist attacks</p>
<p>Bottom line: building new nuclear plants in a competitive electricity market (one that includes wind, solar, geothermal, ocean energy, etc.) is simply not economical.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
