Okavango Challenge

In a recent letter to the Washington Post, browbeating it for daring to pen an article on errors in the IPCC report, David Hilfiker complained stridently that ""Climate-change deniers get too much help from Post story"" and that even though the article was accurate the Post was wrong to run it because: [quote]

""The Feb. 15 front-page article "Missteps weigh on agenda for climate" was infuriating, a perfect example of why so many Americans still don’t believe in the coming crisis of global climate change. Read closely, your article was technically accurate, but the language and placement of information gave the impression that the overwhelming scientific consensus on global climate change might be in danger.""

~ So, he acknowledges that the article was perfectly accurate, but inveighs against it on the grounds that it questions the supposed orthodoxy! Is this a healthy attitude?

I was curious about who would write such a ehtically dubious letter, so I checked out David Hilfiker, esq., and found his ’spiritual’ website: www.davidhilfiker.com, where he writes "sermons" on the evils of capitalism, in one of which he says: [quote]

————————————————————
""As long as profit maximization, the sanctity of private property, and distribution solely by supply and demand remain the unexamined bases of our economic system, we will not be able to feed the hungry or prevent ecological destruction.

Among those who ardently hope and work for change, there is a different opinion. Many believe that without a fundamental re-orientation in power relationships no change will be possible. It is power, they say, that determines the course of society; until those who rule society are replaced, we cannot expect justice or sustainability

We do not have much time left before environmental catastrophe overtakes us. We won’t find environmental balance unless we deal with injustice. The current economic system cannot bring either justice or sustainability""
————————————————————

- in short, this is a call for revolution to bring about "sustainability". Yet again, you can see the real agenda start to emerge.

IS this letter to WP a good example of the sort of activists we are dealing with on global warming?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/19/AR2010021905037.html

http://www.davidhilfiker.com/docs/Economics/Constitutive%20Rules.htm
.

Global warming is a joke……but if you want to help Gore’s bank account you go right ahead……..

Hi, I am doing a project in Geography and I need help on this part of the report section.

Supporting Park Expansion: Present arguments in support of continued conservation and park expansion. Think, why is this park valuable? Be sure to include the ideas of sustainability and stewardship in your response.

PLEASE HELP ME ANSWER THAT WHOLE PARAGRAPH THERE FOR MY NATIONAL PARK.

THE NATIONAL PARK IS "GLACIER NATIONAL PARK" in British Columbia, Canada.

dgfg

A report released today by the UK Government’s Sustainable Development Commission calls for around-the-clock monitoring of driver’s speed to force them to slow down and help cut down their emissions of Co2 in the battle against global warming.

It calls for taking control of the car’s speed away from the driver and having it controlled by the government via satellite.

Is that alright with you?

The report said: [quote]

———————————————————–
""The UK Sustainable Development Commission yesterday released a report recommending the use of average speed cameras for round-the-clock tracking of motorist journeys nationwide. The government advisory body said that widespread deployment of average speed cameras was required to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide by automobiles, a factor that some believe is linked to global changes in temperature. The report made a number of recommendations affecting the driving public.

"The business models associated with private motoring are not aligned with sustainability," the report explained

The report also called for a "clear timetable" for the introduction of Intelligent Speed Adaptation technology that would use global positioning satellites to take away control of vehicle speed from the driver, making it impossible for a car to exceed the limit on a given road. The same information communications technology (ICT) infrastructure could be used for congestion pricing, tolling of every journey and charging for insurance by the number of miles driven. The commission explained that such systems would require a substantial and ongoing financial investment.""
—————————————————————

It also said that such a system could be a big step towards road-pricing where every journey would be taxed appropriately.

Of course, this is just the UK, but once the technology is in place and shown to work, no doubt there will be calls by international bodies to roll it out worldwide to help fight global warming.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/30/3031.asp
The full report is available here: http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/
EDIT - @ Vampire Muffin Man.

Well said. For commercial vehicles it many be worth looking at as an industry standard. But not private vehicles, that as you say is fascistic.

There are a few problems with this:
1) It assumes gasoline powered cars. Spending ANY money on gasoline powered infrastructure, beyond maintenance, is just plain stupid.
2) Taxing someone for travel is one thing that I would say is grounds for revolution. Property taxes, sales taxes (fuel) and registration taxes are one thing, but taxing someone for going to the store or to a friend’s house is seriously fcuked up.
3) Going fast isn’t the most significant destroyer of mileage in modern cars. It’s acceleration and poor maintenance. My car gets basically the same mileage (~35 MPG) whether I’m going 55 MPH or 70 MPH. In town, when I average 30 MPH, though, I can vary my mileage by as much as 5 MPG just by *how* I’m driving and how my car is running and if I’m running the AC. (I always keep track of my mileage as it’s an excellent indicator of how my car is running.)
4) The obvious potential for abuse. Considering that the very idea is abusive, I don’t think I really have to explain here.

Here’s an idea, only implement this system on commercial vehicles… I don’t think that you’d hear much complaining from companies, especially if they could use the system to keep track of their vehicles, drivers, freight, etc. One thing with this, though, is that many large trucks can get *better* mileage by speeding down hills and then slowing (or rather not maintaining) as they climb the next, so that makes the system pointless in that case.

Basically, though, I’m sure everyone can agree that this idea is fascist and shouldn’t be allowed to even come close to being implemented.
The way to solve the problem with automotive emissions is through making better cars (hybrids and electrics) and improving infrastructure, not taking away freedom.

Edit: Let me explain why I believe that it’s fascist. Being monitored to ensure you aren’t breaking the law… So will you allow all your phone conversations to be monitored to ensure that you aren’t conspiring to commit a crime? (Oh, wait…) Will you now allow cameras in your home to ensure that you aren’t abusing your family members? Will you now allow audio monitors everywhere to ensure that you aren’t speaking out against your now totally fascist government? Will you agree to be ‘chipped’ so that your whereabouts can be monitored 24/7 to ensure that you aren’t assembling with others where you can’t be directly monitored?
Exactly where should the line be drawn?
It may seem like a small step, but with modern technology, your near the edge of el Capitan here, so…you may want to watch it.

Continual monitoring your driving is on the edge of being search[and seizure] which requires some reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed. Continuing to weaken that legal tenant is an extremely bad idea if you enjoy freedom. If it’s allowed, it will absolutely, 100% without a doubt be abused and lead to more eroding of freedoms. Therefor, it must not be allowed to happen.

If you want to limit speeds, then simply limit the speed that a vehicle can go. Or perhaps have an internal chip that only allows the vehicle to achieve the maximum allowed speed on whatever section of road it’s traveling on (though it should allow for some acceleration beyond that as there are instances where going faster can help avoid an accident). There should not be ANY external monitoring of a private conveyance…

_

Hi,

I am doing a presentation on why it is important in business to use renewable energy. I really need some facts and figures, maybe sustainability reports etc, for companies that are taking measures to reduce their carbon footprint by using renewable energy (such as Tesco) and those companies which are not, and have a large carbon footprint (eg Shell).

Does anybody have any ideas?

Thanks

tesco are greenwashing, see all that heating, fridges, trucks…. they only generate a tiny fraction of what they use, made no moves yet to rationalise their distribution network, put doors on the fridges etc.
better to compare smaller genuinely greening company like the body shop or the co-operative with smaller ‘greenwashing’ company like morrisons or ford u.k..

you can get a lot of information from their own sites, all reputable businesses publish financial reports etc.

http://www.peopleforum.cn/viewthread.php?tid=6223&extra=page%3D1

China’s military strength ranks second in the world in terms of expenditure, the number of troops and weaponry, according to a report released Thursday by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS).

The data provokes many questions from scholars and the public, though the government think tank emphasized the ranking was just based on selected factors and is not a comparison of real military power of the concerned countries.

The US, Japan and Germany rank as the top three in terms of comprehensive national strength and China is in seventh place, according to the Report on Comprehensive National Power Assessment, which evaluated the militaries of 11 countries, including seven Western countries and Brazil, Russia, India and China, the so-called BRICs.

The evaluation index includes five direct constituent elements – territory and natural resources, population, economy, military and science and technology – and four influencing factors – social development, sustainability, security and domestic politics and international contributions, it said.

To the surprise of many, China’s military power ranks second, with a total score of 33.3, behind the US, which scores 90.08, and just ahead of Russia, with 31.08.

"The high rank of China is mainly because it gets a higher score in terms of troop numbers and equipment," the report said. (Global Times)

A nation’s ‘firepower’ should mainly depend on its combat and maneuver abilities, both of which are really wanting for the Chinese troops. Besides, China’s military equipment is also far from having an edge over others.

They are working on their first aircraft carrier. The USA is having problems maintaining its 11 carrier fleet.

They are building ten new ships a year. The USA is retiring 10 ships a year and only building 5. The US Navy is smaller now than it was in 1917 with less than 300 ships. If nothing changes, China will have a bigger navy by 2020, excluding carriers. Many think that the Battleship was the ship of WW ONE, the carrier was the ship of WW TWO and the submarine will be the ship of the next conflict.

They are making advanced fighters and other planes. The USA on the other hand spent billions developing the B2 bomber, only to make 20 and now has only 19. It spent billions developing the F22 and has stopped production at less than 200. And the same kind of cuts are already being talked about for the F35. The USA is close to losing its pure numerical advantage and will soon lose its technological advantage.

China is already challenging the US Navy at sea. It is flying its planes very close to our, causing at least one air to air crash with the result of a top secret spy plane landed on Chinese land, giving them the ability to strip it down and look it over. Their ships are also playing chicken with our ships. They would not be doing that if they did not think they soon will be able to make us back down.

The 20th century was the Century of the USA….it looks like the 21st Century will be the Century of China..

You did not think the USA would stay #1 forever did you?

I’m doing a report for school on sustainability and need some ways to produce seasonal fruits/vegetables in the off-seasons instead of importing them
Thanks
For some crops it is enough to use row covers while others need the protection of insulated cold frames set to trap solar heat. The most energy expensive local option would be heated green houses or hydroponics for very cold sensitive crops. None of these are good for anything except small crops.

Eco-warriors will be spluttering into their fair trade organic coffee this morning as new research shows that atmospheric levels of CO2 have effectively remained unchanged since the advent of the industrial revolution.

Scientists at Bristol University in the UK say that, despite rising emissions, the world is still able to store a ’significant’ amount of greenhouse gases in its oceans and forests and has continued to absorb more than half the carbon dioxide produced by humans over the last 160 years.

This is despite emissions of CO2 increasing from two billion tonnes a year in 1850 to the current 35 billion tonnes. The report is based on historical records taken from Antarctic ice core samples rather than unreliable climate models.

http://www.tgdaily.com/sustainability-features/44622-co2-levels-stable-since-1850
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6538300/Climate-change-study-shows-Earth-is-still-absorbing-carbon-dioxide.html

Actually, although I am a firm believer that most "global warming" science is politically motivated and not based on reality at all.

However, the headline "CO2 steady since 1850" is not a correct characterization of their findings. Rather, it’s discussing the "missing CO2" which has confounded global warming scientists for a long time.

Essentially, CO2 levels are rising, but not nearly as quickly as would be expected based on our rising output. It seems that the Earth sucks down CO2 almost (but not quite, at least not yet) as fast as we can crank it out.

The RATE of CO2 levels climbing is not as high as it once was, in spite of us feeding the earth CO2 faster than ever.

I’m writing a report about a company that cares about the environment and contributes towards the sustainability of the environment by imposing stringent measurements to curb possible negative effects to the environment, eliminating waste and utilizing resources in an environment friendly manner. and making sure that their production process is environment friendly. I need a creative head line and right now my mind has gone blank. PLEASE HELP ME. have you got ant suggestions for a good headline? i’ll give 10 point to the best.
for a better and professional feed back, you can try with some online writing service, like fastcustomessays.com, they will guide you, I am a customer of that, so i can gurantee you with there service, or you can find by your own choice through search engines, good luck

for consciously defrauding the human race so epically with their Global Warmism, and causing untold death and misery by prohibiting the development of the global south?

"We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

- Prof. Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports

–

“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”

- Prof. Chris Folland,
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

–

"I believe it is appropriate to have an ‘over-representation’ of the facts on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience."
- Al Gore,
Climate Change activist

–

"Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control."
- Professor Maurice King

–

"It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true."
- Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace

–

“The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.”
- Dr David Frame,
Climate Modeler, Oxford University

Yes. Thanks to liars and quacks like these, rural Africans (who are denied access to electricity because power plants are so evil) die by the thousands from domestic pollution, like the smoke from their wood-fired stoves. (But then, I’ve noticed for a long time that brown people dying in droves never bothers the Save the Planet crowd if it makes them look less important.)

I wish we could tax greenie-lefties at 100% mouth capacity and use the money to build these desperate people the power plants that would bring them prosperity.

for consciously defrauding the human race so epically with their Global Warmism, and causing untold death and misery by prohibiting the development of the global south?

"We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

- Prof. Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports

–

“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”

- Prof. Chris Folland,
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

–

"I believe it is appropriate to have an ‘over-representation’ of the facts on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience."
- Al Gore,
Climate Change activist

–

"Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control."
- Professor Maurice King

–

"It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true."
- Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace

–

“The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.”
- Dr David Frame,
Climate Modeler, Oxford University

Yes. Thanks to liars and quacks like these, rural Africans (who are denied access to electricity because power plants are so evil) die by the thousands from domestic pollution, like the smoke from their wood-fired stoves. (But then, I’ve noticed for a long time that brown people dying in droves never bothers the Save the Planet crowd if it makes them look less important.)

I wish we could tax greenie-lefties at 100% mouth capacity and use the money to build these desperate people the power plants that would bring them prosperity.