Huckabee says no he didn’t, but yes indeedy he did
According to Mike Huckabee, he has never supported a cap-and-trade approach to limiting carbon emissions. As he puts it point-blank on his website:
“In a recent internet post, a contributor makes the claim that I supported cap-and-trade in late 2007 while running for President.
To put it simply, that’s just not true.
If companies chose to participate voluntarily as part of their corporate policy, then fine. But I was clear that we could not force U.S. businesses to do what their Chinese counterparts refused to – and doing so would have been a serious job killer.
I understand this issue well, and I realize the potential damage that would occur if it passes because I was the chair of the 37 state-member Oil and Gas Compact Commission for 2 years. In fact, I led the state or Arkansas through the process of developing the Fayetteville Shale play of natural gas.
This kind of mandatory energy policy would have a horrible impact on this nation’s job market. I never did support and never would support it – period.”
However, there’s overwhelming video evidence to the contrary. On Oct. 13, 2007, at the Global Warming and Energy Solutions Conference in the critical primary state of New Hampshire, Huckabee acknowledged the challenge of climate change. “We all have a responsibility to recognize that climate change is here, it’s real, and that what we have to do is quit pointing fingers as to who’s at fault and who’s responsibility it is to fix it, and recognize that it’s all of our fault and we all have responsibility to fix it.”
At the 2:00 minute mark in the video, Huckabee goes on to make his stance on cap and trade as explicit as possible. He says:
“I also support cap-and-trade of carbon emissions and I was disappointed when the Senate rejected a carbon counting system to measure the sources of emissions because that would have been the first and most important step in implementing true cap-and-trade.”
I know, I know. A politician who flip flops. Yawn. Newt Gingrich has made the same transition, from an ardent advocate of cap and trade — “I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support” — to an implacable foe of a proposal that he now considers part of a secular-socialist plot to destroy America.
But Steve Benen at Washington Monthly makes a larger point:
“It wasn’t too long ago — within the last decade — that there was a basic spectrum of policy positions Republicans accepted on a range of national issues. Not every candidate agreed across the board with every position, but the GOP’s general approach was fairly easy to identify.
On health care, for example, the Republican mainstream envisioned a system involving an individual mandate. On arms control, the Republican mainstream embraced policies along the lines of the original START treaty.
And on energy policy, the Republican mainstream loved cap and trade. Indeed, just two years ago, the ticket of John McCain and Sarah Palin vowed to establish “a cap-and-trade system that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions” and pursue “alternatives to carbon-based fuels.”
The point, of course, isn’t just that the Republican mainstream has shifted sharply to the right, it’s that the mainstream has fallen off a right-wing cliff with surprising speed. Positions that were widely accepted by Republicans just a few years ago are now considered communist plots to destroy the American way of life.”
It does make you wonder who’s driving the Republican train, leaving people such as Huckabee and Gingrich scrambling to keep up.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
260 comments Add your comment
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
4:12 pm
carlos
@ 4:08
Agreed. And much the same can be said of the Democrats.
jm
December 16th, 2010
4:12 pm
No one’s driving the train. Its politics.
“but yes indeedy he did” I got a good laugh out of that….
Of course, saying people should report is different than saying there should be an actual cap. However, his statement was obviously a prelude to implementing a full cap-trade system as he states.
Whatever. A carbon tax would be far better than cap and trade, as far as CO2 goes.
Matti
December 16th, 2010
4:13 pm
JLK2,
Michael Steele gave an insightful interview yesterday about why he’s running again to be RNC Chairman.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-december-15-2010/the-great-gaffesby
The fun begins 2:12 into the video.
Keep up the good fight!
December 16th, 2010
4:13 pm
md, the purpose again is that caps may be lowered over time. Even if set at current emissions level today, add a plant and you have to effectively reduce.
Hillbilly, the market solution allows a small business that cannot afford a million dollar scrubber for its small emission that exceed their cap to buy at a market price the additional credits needed. Just saying that no plant can exceed say, 1000 parts in 10 million (which is the older method of regulation) does give an advantage at times to the larger companies with deeper pockets even though the smaller business may be more efficient. Again, this in concept is a smarter regulation method to help small business compete and actually may be able to move quicker than a manufacturer with very large plants.
RAPbama
December 16th, 2010
4:13 pm
Cap and Trade is based on idea that human CO2 emissions are to blame. We humans emit only about 2-5% of the CO2, at most. The rest comes from natural sources. Yes, thermometer readings are up. Those things don’t have an agenda.
Cap and Trade, in this economic time, is as dead as dead can get.
As far as Republicans go, they are a mismash of reactionists, with no vision for the country at all. At least the Dem’s tried on health care. The Republicans can only favor, not the rich, it’s worse than that. They favor the ultra wealthy. That top 1% that controls 50% of our wealth and then tries to stay as quiet as possible. It’s time gross accumlation of wealth was taxed, not incomes. Incomes are so middle class and the middle class is so passe’.
larry
December 16th, 2010
4:13 pm
http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/deal-state-government-workforce-778417.html
Yep, that is a good way to handle the high unemployment problem in the state, make it higher.
I feel sorry for the people who voted for this clown.
Ms. Yates, please do your duty and indict him and Cagle before its too late.
jm
December 16th, 2010
4:14 pm
Oh, one other thing. Spurring innovation would be far better than cap-trade or carbon tax. Someone should hang out a $3 Billion prize for the company that can mass produce solar cells that produce at $1/watt efficiency….. that would get things going….
Hillbilly Deluxe
December 16th, 2010
4:15 pm
Keep up the good fight
Fair enough. I still disagree, though.
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:16 pm
Well I’m surprised that the next candidate for Vice
President on the republican ticket with running mate
Mitt Romney has been unable to explain his position
on cap and trade in an understandable manner to democratic
sympathizers. I’m sure he will request prayer for them
on Sunday.
marky mark
December 16th, 2010
4:16 pm
re: Oaky Woods…..new story just posted here online…
“Republican leaders of the State Senate sent the State Properties Commission a letter asking them to delay their decision to spend $28.7 million in taxpayer money on 10,015 acres of Oaky Woods.”
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
December 16th, 2010
4:18 pm
Well, make fun of the Rev. Huckabee all you want, but you’ll change your tune when he makes his swearing-in speech and then straps on the bass fiddle to back up the Marine Corps band.
Have a good p.m. everybody.
md
December 16th, 2010
4:19 pm
“Even if set at current emissions level today, add a plant and you have to effectively reduce. ”
Yes, by buying unused credits………..still with an end result of zero. Both companies are still pumping just as much into the environment but some middle man (Al?) is making a fortune moving pieces around the board.
I'm Regular
December 16th, 2010
4:19 pm
and his gentlemanly demeanor, courtesy and dignity.
Why absoloutely. It is so refreshing to hear someone say “please kiss my derriere,” as opposed to what one might expect from the more common, regular Joe. If only we could convince the Democrats to wear periwigs, life with them would be so much more tolerable, don’t you suppose.
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:22 pm
I guess we should allot credits between nations and buy
the right to emit from nations that don’t emit then our
corporations could emit to their heart’s content and the
international community would praise us rather than
denigrate us and ditto for China.
ty webb
December 16th, 2010
4:24 pm
md,
bingo! I wish I could send you a year’s supply of turtle wax.
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
4:24 pm
Regular
It has been my experience that the common, regular Joe is far more gentlemanly, polite and courteous than those who presuppose to be somehow their superiors out to inform them…that goes for the left and the right alike. Personally, I find manners to not be as outdated as some would. I guess I’m just an old fashioned left wing liberal…
Mary Elizabeth
December 16th, 2010
4:27 pm
“It does make you wonder who’s driving the Republican train, leaving people such as Huckabee and Gingrich scrambling to keep up.”
A profound question. Thank you for presenting it.
md
December 16th, 2010
4:27 pm
“I guess we should allot credits between nations and buy
the right to emit from nations that don’t emit then our
corporations could emit to their heart’s content”
I wouldn’t be surprised if a “trading” party hasn’t already scoped out the dirt hut factories of backwoods planet earth just for that reason. Too much money already invested in “cap and trade Investment Companies” for something not to happen. I’m sure their lobbyists are none too happy that the dems are losing total control on the hill.
Matti
December 16th, 2010
4:27 pm
Keep up the Good Fight @ 4:13,
I believe that enabling small businesses to have more equal footing with big business is the very aspect of Cap and Trade that drives its opposition. While the “anti-leftist” conservative forces claim they are reacting to overreaching government regulation based on “junk science” delivered in some vast conspiracy to obtain *gasp* research grants, I think that is merely the cover story. It’s ALWAYS about the money with them, and while they give lip service to being pro free market and pro-small business, everything they support favors the big players (donors) over the small. They feed the big dogs and let them run free, while telling the little dogs that their “leftist leaders” are forcing them to stay on the porch. That’s what it looks like to me.
carlosgvv
December 16th, 2010
4:27 pm
Josef Nix
True, but the Democrats aren’t as open about whose tune they dance to as the Republicans.
Paul
December 16th, 2010
4:28 pm
JKL2 3:39
The first part of your question: “I am still trying to figure out how leaving tax rates the same is considered a tax cut for the rich”
The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 both had provisions that the tax rates would revert to the previous rates Jan 1, 2011. Only way to stop that was through new legislation.
So, we had a permanent tax rate system, a temporary rate was put into place. Taking something temporary (the lower rates) and having them become permanent (lower rates) is not exactly leaving them the same. Leaving the system alone would mean the old, higher rates come back into effect. Introducing and passing legislation to have permanent rates (which just happen to be the same as the temporary rates) is another thing altogether.
Hillbilly
Nice, succinct post on reservations about the proposals. Just on the heels of the financial meltdown, I did wonder about the wisdom of letting these same bunch of guys (or those of their mindset) have access to literally trillions of dollars’ worth of new play money -
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:29 pm
ty webb
December 16th, 2010
4:24 pm
———————————————
I am pretty sure most turtles don’t like to
be waxed as they are not too hairy to begin with…
Keep up the good fight!
December 16th, 2010
4:29 pm
md… again I did say that levels can be reduced and that even if set at today’s level, with population growth, it would stop the upward trend.
Of course, you could just say, no one can exceed X parts per million and if you exceed that, then you have to do whatever it takes to reduce and if that means you close your business, then so be it.
But you fault Gore for investing in what he believes in and putting his money where his mouth is….isnt’ that just capitalism. Why do you hate America?
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
4:29 pm
carlos
@ 4:27
There is a great deal of truth in what you say…
ty webb
December 16th, 2010
4:30 pm
barking frog,
true…although beaver waxing seems to be a pretty good business to be in.
Mary Elizabeth
December 16th, 2010
4:31 pm
To Josef and Dusty –
Hello brother Josef and sister Dusty.
I claim you both! So I guess that makes the two of you
brother and sister.
Now if I could just work the same “fait accompli” with Fred and Del, I would have accomplished more than Marley did with Ebenezer. Nothing ventured, nothing gained!
“Sleigh bells ring – are you listening?”
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 16th, 2010
4:32 pm
Hillbilly Deluxe
I agree that the smaller manufacturers would be at a disadvantage (as manufacturers will probably be the worst of the carbon offenders).
But who will monitor the Communist countries on this? Or countries like India?
Is there free and open travel through those countries?
The US will then be at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to manufacturing (as if we aren’t in the hole already).
The only thing I can think of is that if a country doesn’t agree to impartial monitoring then trade tariffs need to be put into place until compliance.
On the one hand China has a very strong blue-collar workforce that could possibly rebel if the factories were shut down.
Add to that (at this time) there is a huge population of recent college graduates that cannot find a job that pays as well as a blue-collar job and maybe (just maybe) China is on the cusp of another revolution.
md
December 16th, 2010
4:33 pm
“Personally, I find manners to not be as outdated as some would. I guess I’m just an old fashioned left wing liberal…”
One doesn’t have to be an “old fashioned left wing liberal” to agree with that statement………………
I find it sad that so many don’t even look behind them when going through doors these days……..of course I’m an ass when the door slams in my face and always tell them “thank you” in a rather loud voice once I’m through the door myself.
RAPbama
December 16th, 2010
4:34 pm
I think that the time of partisan politics is at an end. As my Harvard lawyer cousin says, “The Constitution did not anticipate the two party system.” All this rancor does nothing and just adds to natural problems an evolving society will have. We need independant lawmakers. Parties should be outlawed, very nicely of course.
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:34 pm
ty webb
December 16th, 2010
4:30 pm
barking frog,
true…although beaver waxing seems to be a pretty good business to be in.
—————————-
I guess waxing beavers or turtles is ok , but
if you increase emissions please sign up for cap and trade…
jm
December 16th, 2010
4:35 pm
Nouriel Roubini is a retard.
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
4:36 pm
Mary Elizabeth
And a cheery good p.m. to you. I always have had the special warm spot in my heart for Sister Dusty and now for you as well! I kinda like Fred and Del both, too. A lot of testosterone running about, but, boys will be boys…
Doggone/GA
December 16th, 2010
4:37 pm
“And wouldn’t this just allow polluters to “buy” their way out of compliance?”
Not if you keep reducing the number of “stocks” that are available to buy. What cap-and-trade does is give an incentive to reduce emissions, because the company can then make back some, or all, of the cost by selling the “stocks” they no longer need.
It is, and is meant to be, a MARKET based system. Regulation on the other hand, brings in the need for inspections and lawsuits against violators, all that stuff that can make it easy for a big pocketed company to postpone making needed changes.
md
December 16th, 2010
4:38 pm
“But you fault Gore for investing in what he believes in and putting his money where his mouth is….isnt’ that just capitalism.”
Didn’t Martha go to jail for the same thing Al is basically doing??
Insider trading is insider trading……….I guess it depends on the angle one is looking at it.
Didn’t we just go through a big bru ha ha about politicians enriching themselves through public service?? Al has done the same………positioned himself from the inside out.
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
4:41 pm
md
“One doesn’t have to be an “old fashioned left wing liberal” to agree with that statement………………”
Much agreed…just because we may disagree is no reason to be rude and vulgar.
Matti
December 16th, 2010
4:41 pm
Mary Elizabeth,
Those aren’t sleigh bells; they’re emergency response vehicles.
jt
December 16th, 2010
4:41 pm
Where’s SoCo?
By Christian Boone
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
A U.S. Customs agent from Stockbridge faces charges of helping smuggle guns and drug money through Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, federal officials announced Thursday.
Scout
December 16th, 2010
4:43 pm
Jay:
You’re “whistling in the dark” again. The second wave of the backlash is coming. Might as well ride it to shore.
md
December 16th, 2010
4:43 pm
“What cap-and-trade does is give an incentive to reduce emissions, because the company can then make back some, or all, of the cost by selling the “stocks” they no longer need.”
And I’m guessing that in the real world, the companies just write it off as an expense and pass it on to the consumer like they always do…………….
Mike Huckabee
December 16th, 2010
4:43 pm
As Joe Walsh once said, “Vote for Me.” I know I’m too nice to be president, but don’t let that stop you. America needs a good lead player and I’m the closest thing there is. A good bass player will do, if Joe doesn’t want to run.
Hillbilly Deluxe
December 16th, 2010
4:43 pm
Common Sense
I have a feeling China is going to do what they think is best for them and they don’t really care what anybody else does, including us.
Paul
December 16th, 2010
4:45 pm
Still no ideas on who’s pulling the strings to cause the Republican Party to veer hard right in so short a time?
RW-(the original)
December 16th, 2010
4:46 pm
About that Al Gore connection
R.I.P.: Al Gore’s Chicago Climate Exchange Has Died
Global warming-inspired cap and trade has been one of the most stridently debated public policy controversies of the past 15 years. But it is dying a quiet death. In a little reported move, the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) announced on Oct. 21 that it will be ending carbon trading – the only purpose for which it was founded – this year.
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:46 pm
Mary Elizabeth, after our conversation about unity through
diversity, I read that President Obama was acclaiming the
same philosophy. Is it possible that you may have influenced
him since you discovered it at an early age?
Bill Hilly
December 16th, 2010
4:46 pm
China will do what is best for them, regardless of what they think.
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
4:46 pm
jt
Where to?
jm
December 16th, 2010
4:47 pm
wheeee. state job cuts. probably overdue although I have no way of knowing one way or the other for sure. gut instinct says there’s fat.
md
December 16th, 2010
4:47 pm
If I recall, on the world stage, cap and trade will apply only to the “developed” countries. This is where those dreaded definitions come into play……..that means China and India and all the other “developing” countries get different rules…………..
JDW
December 16th, 2010
4:48 pm
@ Hillbilly,
I think you are right when you say that cap and trade is a way for industries to keep on producing emissions and there would certainly be money to be made there.
I tend towards it as a solution because you can regulate emissions at the macro level while using market forces to add the proper costs to those industries that choose to pollute. As for the money part, yes it will feed a few bloodsuckers, but on the flip side we could tax those profits and tap a new source of funding.
I think the problem with creating regulation as opposed to a market is writing and enforcing it effectively across the entire business community. Businesses understand costs so that would be easier for them to digest than regulations.
Just my 2 cents
Doggone/GA
December 16th, 2010
4:49 pm
“And I’m guessing that in the real world, the companies just write it off as an expense and pass it on to the consumer like they always do”
Some will, certainly. But those who are large polluters, in particular, stand to be able to make serious improvements and the recoup some, or all, of the cost of those improvements by selling their credits.
Jay
December 16th, 2010
4:49 pm
It’s better to whistle in the dark, Scout. It’s usually quieter, and that facilitates a greater appreciation of the finer tonal qualities of the music.
AmVet
December 16th, 2010
4:49 pm
Voluntary cap & trade?????
Is that part of the idiotic right-wing concept of let the free-market police itself?
And of course that is exactly what BP, Transocean and Haliburton did vis a vis the Deepwater horizon debacle.
And exactly what Goldman Sachs and AIG among many others did during the attempted corporate destruction of capitalism in 2008.
It’s a good thing you boys ain’t chicken farmers who, would for a couple of extra dollars, let the foxes guard your hen houses.
And then b!tch when 3,000,000,000,000 of your hens went “missing” and then blame the police…
Fletch
December 16th, 2010
4:49 pm
It doesn’t surprise me that a politician would, Flip Flop, Spin, Lie, Cheat, Cover Up, Deny, Forget, Back Track etc…..
What I’m always amazed at are that people that will continually run out to support and defend them.
JDW
December 16th, 2010
4:49 pm
Enter your comd
December 16th, 2010
4:47 pm
“If I recall, on the world stage, cap and trade will apply only to the “developed” countries. This is where those dreaded definitions come into play……..that means China and India and all the other “developing” countries get different rules…………..”
Each country is making its own rules…a global cap and trade would be effective but I don’t think thats happening anytime soon.
jm
December 16th, 2010
4:50 pm
Cap and Trade is bad. Not for trying its intentions. But for the mechanism, corruption, waste, and influence peddling it would generate of its creation.
Carbon Tax would be better because none of this applies to a carbon tax. Better yet, just innovate our way out. Or if there’s a carbon tax, ramp it up, then ramp it down over 20 years.
Doggone/GA
December 16th, 2010
4:50 pm
Those who would like to learn more about how cap-and-trade can ACTUALLY work – check into the successful use of cap-and-trade to control sulpher emissions. That’s a practical demonstration of it, as opposed to theoretical speculations.
Mary Elizabeth
December 16th, 2010
4:51 pm
Josef 4:36
You nailed it, Josef, regarding the source of the conflict! Thank you for the good feelings toward yours truly. The feeling is mutual!
Matti 4:41
You nailed it, too, Matti! But sleigh bells lift the soul, not just the body. Hope they hear those “frequencies” I’m trying to send them both with good cheer and wishes.
Just got in from seeing “Secretariat.” I am in love again – with that horse! God love him!
One in a million!
Paul
December 16th, 2010
4:52 pm
Cap n Trade is dead, folks. Dead, dead, dead. And no amount of fundamentalist fervor will resurrect it anytime soon.
Don’t ANY of the cons here have any idea what caused the seismic shift in the Republican Party?
AmVet
December 16th, 2010
4:52 pm
Yep, we live in a new hell (of a world).
The Democrats trot out these goofy “changes” that often exacerbate the problems and the Do Nothings advocate that living up to their name and letting things get constantly worse, is a better “solution”.
As both work for the exact same paymasters, is it any wonder?
Scout
December 16th, 2010
4:53 pm
Jay:
I prefer to shine a light in the dark. It makes the “undesirables” slither back under the rocks.
jm
December 16th, 2010
4:53 pm
Doggone 4:50 – yes, sulphur cap trade worked. But a carbon cap/trade is such an order of magnitude larger and so expansive, that it is hardly the same thing.
A carbon tax would be far, far better than cap and trade, for CO2.
Union
December 16th, 2010
4:53 pm
what was that whole cap and trade scam that the un and some countries were involved in not too long ago?
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:55 pm
Scout
December 16th, 2010
4:53 pm
——————————-
Hey Scout, how’s the puppies?
stands for decibels
December 16th, 2010
4:55 pm
sfd.. do you think the anti obama rant by the dems will slow down soon? i was wondering the same thing.. if they extend the tax cuts.. then someone from within the democratic party may challenge him on just that issue alone?
I can’t speak for all or even most of my fellow ranters. I can say though that from what I’ve heard, the real concerns aren’t so much the tax rate deal alone, but what it portends for battles ahead next year. Football analogies aside (“he must’ve thought this was the CFL, he punted on third down!”) and worries over things like a ginned-up battle over raising the debt ceiling, I’ll leave to others. I just expect Obama to go to the wall on Social Security; if he can’t do that, that’s probably where I say adios.
AmVet
December 16th, 2010
4:56 pm
jm @4:50, you are THE man!
I was wondering if I would live long enough to see someone posit that!
I’ve dropped countless hints to the neo-cons about what is happening in British Columbia, but asking them to read up on that would be like asking Sarah P. to read a newspaper…
Fletch
December 16th, 2010
4:56 pm
You can insert either party into the following scenario.
_______: Are firmly committed to a cleaner healthier America with low taxes and good paying jobs for all.
Big Money: We cannot support that kind of platform and will immediately withdraw financial support of any candidate who promotes it.
_______: Are firmly against any platform that may have negative consequences for those who provide economic growth and opportunities for all Americans.
Doggone/GA
December 16th, 2010
4:57 pm
“But a carbon cap/trade is such an order of magnitude larger and so expansive, that it is hardly the same thing.”
Size doesn’t make a bit of difference. It works the same regardless.
JDW
December 16th, 2010
4:58 pm
jm
December 16th, 2010
4:53 pm
“A carbon tax would be far, far better than cap and trade, for CO2.”
Now you have gone off and used the “T” word
…thats going to rile the R’s.
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:58 pm
Paul
December 16th, 2010
4:52 pm
—————————————
in order to determine if there is a seismic shift you
have to determine which end of the spectrum is the
true position, or if either is…..
Scout
December 16th, 2010
4:59 pm
barking frog:
4 months old this week and growing like weeds. Lot’s of work but lot’s of fun too.
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:59 pm
Size doesn’t make a bit of difference. It works the same regardless.
—————————————————-
Glad someone else agrees with me…….
stands for decibels
December 16th, 2010
4:59 pm
Wow, that’s almost as bad as “I will shut down Guantanamo Bay within one year”.
lil’ B, I am deeply sorry that you did not get the closure that you didn’t vote for in 2008.
RAPbama
December 16th, 2010
5:00 pm
Cap and Trade is based on scientific conjecture and much of that conjecture is meant to advance careers. If you absolutely believe CO2 levels are a leading indicator of temp rises, the ice cores argue against you. By about 80 years for each warming episode in the last three warming cycles. I have the plots of the data, from a recent conference of engineers. Temps start to rise 80 years before CO2 levels rise, per the ice cores. Excuse me for sticking to the facts, if they are not expedient for advancing a cause.
Scout
December 16th, 2010
5:00 pm
Question to ponder:
Why didn’t Native-Americans build ships and discover Europe ?
JDW
December 16th, 2010
5:00 pm
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
4:59 pm
“Size doesn’t make a bit of difference. It works the same regardless.”
Thats what I keep saying….
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
5:01 pm
Scout
December 16th, 2010
4:59 pm
—————————-
just about time for everything to get chewed….
Fletch
December 16th, 2010
5:01 pm
Scout – “Why didn’t Native-Americans build ships and discover Europe ?”
Because they were smart.
Mary Elizabeth
December 16th, 2010
5:02 pm
barking frog 4:46
How nice. Many throughout the world “see” with the same vision. Paulo shared with me Bob Marley’s song, “One Love” a few weeks back, and now that son is central on my blog. One of my early entries.
Check out “Mary Elizabeth Sings” sometimes and join the movement!
stands for decibels
December 16th, 2010
5:05 pm
Oh, and I did run the 2007 MH video, didn’t hear anything about the cap and trade being voluntary in this 5 minute segment, anyway.
Keep up the good fight!
December 16th, 2010
5:06 pm
Scout… how do you discover a land that is already populated? And who is to say that native americans did not travel at some point to Europe….we only recently discovered some of the extensive travel by the Chinese and the Vikings.
My theory…they did “discover” Europe, realized that it was filled with vermin and disease and blocked it out of their minds…only to have the vermin and disease come here and killed and steal all their land and wealth…
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
5:06 pm
Scout
I asked your question of Unmentionable. His answer, “when you’ve got everything you could want or need here, why go looking elsewhere?”
JDW
December 16th, 2010
5:07 pm
Rapbama…”CO2 levels are a leading indicator of temp rises”
Oh Jezzsh…What the science says…
When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth’s orbit. The warming causes the oceans to give up CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming AND rising temperature causes CO2 rise.
Please note the phenomenon you describe occurs as we come out of an Ice Age…not what is happening now.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
Did you know the 18 hottest years on record occurred over the last 20 years…exceptions were 1987 and 1983.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/12/climate_change
Do you see a trend?
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
5:07 pm
Scout
December 16th, 2010
5:00 pm
Question to ponder:
Why didn’t Native-Americans build ships and discover Europe ?
———————————————————————————————-
Easy. They weren’t greedy.
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
5:08 pm
Scout…
Prince Maddox ring a bell?
barking frog
December 16th, 2010
5:08 pm
Mary Elizabeth
December 16th, 2010
5:02 pm
—————————————–
Will do.
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
5:09 pm
barking frog…
Weren’t greedy, eh? Tell that to those who were here in North Georgia when the Cherokee came in!
Paul
December 16th, 2010
5:09 pm
barking frog
“In order to determine if there is a seismic shift you
have to determine which end of the spectrum is the
true position, or if either is…..”
Why? Either there was a major shift in the Republican Party or there wasn’t. If one views the ‘before’ or ‘after’ as “True” doesn’t matter. Evidence is pretty clear – Republican Party has changed position on major issues in a very short period of time.
Question is, why?
And who’s behind it?
Jackie
December 16th, 2010
5:10 pm
The so-called conservatives position when they find out their knickers are in a knot; CONFLATE, OBFUSCATE, EXTRAPOLATE!!!!
Scout
December 16th, 2010
5:11 pm
barking frog:
Oh yes, have to watch them constantly !
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
5:12 pm
PAUL
Who’s behind it….the Cabal of International Zionist Bankers…don’t you know nuthin?
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 16th, 2010
5:12 pm
AmVet@4:49 pm
And then b!tch when 3,000,000,000,000 of your hens went “missing” and then blame the police…
——————
No That’s me I’m going to corner the market in chickens anyone for a barter. LOL
jm
December 16th, 2010
5:13 pm
Doggone 4:57 – wrong. Sulfur emmissions were really only a power plant issue. CO2 is EVERYWHEEERE. And the sheer size of it creates huge enforcement and corruption issues…. but believe what you want.
I mean, Mini Me fits in a Smart Car. Shouldn’t Andre the Giant drive one?
stands for decibels
December 16th, 2010
5:15 pm
About native Americans’ lack of long-range naval exploration, my half-baked answer–probably for the same reason they didn’t develop wheeled transport. Lack of pressing need. (And a lack of marauding, very very very different cultures from other continents coming in and challenging your turf, one imagines. at least not to the degree that the Europeans experienced.)
josef nix
December 16th, 2010
5:15 pm
Hillbilly
Common sense @ 5:12…uh-oh, looks like we’ve got some competition trying to muscle in on our territory…
Mary Elizabeth
December 16th, 2010
5:17 pm
barking frog 5:08
Thanks much for the interest, barking frog. It would be better to start at the beginning, Nov. 22, 2010, and work forward. The present posts are a little more “heavy” – just at the moment. But life is a process and without the rain, there are no later rainbows to enjoy!
My earlier posts celebrate “unity through diversity.” Hope you enjoy!
Scout
December 16th, 2010
5:17 pm
Why didn’t Native-Americans build ships and discover Europe?
Because they wanted their casino’s over here !
Del
December 16th, 2010
5:18 pm
Hey Scout, Haven’t seen you around for awhile…thought you may have re-enlisted.
Southern Comfort
December 16th, 2010
5:18 pm
jt
Thanks for your concern… I’m here.
Hillbilly Deluxe
December 16th, 2010
5:18 pm
Why didn’t Native-Americans build ships and discover Europe ?
Sometimes, people are perfectly content, right where they are.
jm
December 16th, 2010
5:19 pm
FACT CHECK
US SO2 Market: Originally 17 million tons
US CO2 Market: Over 6 BILLION tons
Think there’s not a difference here? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm think folks. use the neurons. they’re there. just maybe dormant.