Forum Post: MIT Climate Scientist's Wife Threatened In A "Frenzy of Hate"
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 13, 2012, 11:58 a.m. EST by GirlFriday
(17435)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
http://motherjones.com/environment/2012/01/mit-climate-scientists-wife-threatened-frenzy-hate
Well, will you look at that. I am shocked! SHOCKED!! I cannot believe that someone would stoop that low. Oh, wait...............yes I can.
"Do not go gentle into that good night . . ."
Sounds like the trolls on this forum.
Yep
This is the problem with our whole society..... if someone has ideas, opinions or beliefs that do not agree with yours, threats are the next step...
There is no civil discourse between differing "sides" anymore. Even on this forum... if you don't agree with OWS call them names.... and then if OWS doesn't agree with them call them names.
So what was the point of making threats to this man's wife? Will it change the opinion of this researcher?
This is just insane
@ DKAtoday
"You process it from water. You could begin with setting up processing on offshore platforms and process sea/ocean water. You could use wind power in the beginning for the electricity, they could probably convert to burning hydrogen as the process develops. Solar power could also provide electricity for the process. There are even things called tidal generators that use the rise and fall of tides to generate electricity."
Do you understand the law of conservation of energy?
How many windmills are you going to need just to fuel one city worth of cars?
Are you talking about using electrolysis to get hydrogen from sea water? I think if you use salt water you will get hydrogen and chlorine instead of hydrogen and oxygen. It's been a long time since I used my chemistry, but if I'm right you don't want to be making chlorine in quantity.
I don't believe you can do electrolysis with pure H2O. It's not very conductive. You need some kind of electrolyte to get it going.
I've done it with tap water using sodium carbonate as a catalyst to conduct the current. The sodium carbonate doesn't get used up so you can keep adding water all day long and keep things going as long as you have power coming in. If you try it with sea water though you get chlorine released instead of oxygen, not good.
JPB950 ?
I don't suppose you would consider distillation prior to processing as viable?
No not at all viable on a large scale. You could do that, but your creating more problems for yourself. You need to spend a great deal of energy the distill the water (straight heat, vacuum distillation, or reverse osmosis are all energy pigs).
Then you have the salt to deal with, just dumping the salt back in the water causes a change in salinity and is dangerous for the local environment. Getting hydrogen in quantity from distilled sea water would produce massive quantities of salt. A safer and less wasteful method would be to use fresh water. Place you plant on a river or lake where the climate is humid and produces a surplus of water.
The Oceans are being diluted by all of the fresh water entering the system from melting glaciers and ice sheets anyway. Set-up the processing to use the oceans natural currents to distribute your extracted salts and minerals. The ones you decide not to market to industry. Let the currents disperse and mix. Return what you remove as you process and it should not be hazardous. It is all in the set-up. Do it right, right from the start.
Then your operation is going to be severely restricted. You're looking at a major operation in an arctic or antarctic region. The environment is very delicate in those areas. Salt doesn't dissolve instantly, it will sink giving you an area of high salinity at the bottom. You can't make hydrogen faster then the rate of solution of the salt you're making. The sunlight you might like to use to power the operation is weak.
Producing hydrogen for energy is possible, but the technical problems of doing it with ocean water are many and complex. I'm not sure you could solve all the problems of doing it with fresh water.
Fresh water is a premium resource and should not be used in this manner.
Operating in the gulf stream would be an advisable strategy.
Every river that makes it to the ocean is carrying water that isn't going to be drinkable once it mingles with the ocean. There are areas of water surplus. The government has kept climate records for decades, there are areas with water surplus. The north east and north west (as long as you stay west of the mountains) have water surplus. These rainy locations may not have the sunshine you need for solar cells to electrolyze water, but you do have the water.
Why introduce an indelible footprint on an environment we have already made fragile.
Harvest Ocean water. There is a stream in the Pacific just like in the Atlantic.=, where the water and waste could be processed without endangering the environment.
But this is not the forum to pursue this topic as this Post is about attacks on environmental scientists and their family's.
Fine with me, my original comment was just a question about what you were talking about with your comment.
ever heard of desalination?
Yep. That is why I am advocating the use of sea water.
Still more energy needed.
Part of developing the process, and what does it matter if it does not pollute?
What cost pollution?
Who said it won't pollute? You are going to need equipment, land (or seafloor/sea surface) area and a way of disposing the brine so that it doesn't destroy the local environment.
You are talking about replacing millions of years of stockpiled energy with energy extracted from the current solar budget. That will require a massive infrastructure. It's sure to disrupt the natural ecosystem in the locations where it is erected.
A few years back I learned that hydroelectric energy caused more "greenhouse gas" emissions than a comparable fossil fuel plant, and that doesn't even address the other obvious environmental impacts and costs. The gases come from decaying biomass resulting from the construction of dams.
Even if you do come up with a reasonably clean and efficient means of producing alternative energy, it will take time and resources to get it widely deployed.
Big Oil isn't afraid of alternative energy. Demand for their products will continue to grow for the foreseeable future. I really believe that most of Earth's reserves of fossil fuels will be depleted in a few decades, or, at least within a century. I hope beyond belief that I am wrong about the lack of available alternative sources.
valfather ? Do you understand the law of conservation of energy?
What powers the processing of oil? What powers the processing of Coal? What powers the processing of Gas?
Do you understand the law of conservation of energy?
Why should processing of hydrogen be harder then processing of fossil fuels?
Use hydrogen to process hydrogen. Wind power and solar power are optional energy sources. The neat thing with processing hydrogen is your waste ( or another marketable byproduct ) is oxygen.
Yep I can see where pollution will be a big problem with a hydrogen fuel base. Imagine polluting the atmosphere with water and oxygen, totally unconscionable.
"What powers the processing of oil?" Millions of years of stored solar energy. Chlorophyl is the conversion mechanism.
So valfather. Let me get this straight.
Your stating that Crude oil ( you know that stuff that comes up out of the ground in a drilling process ) is already processed and ready to go?
"My dear Kepler, what would you say of the learned here, who, replete with the pertinacity of the asp, have steadfastly refused to cast a glance through the telescope? What shall we make of this? Shall we laugh, or shall we cry?" --Letter from Galileo Galilei to Johannes Kepler
That is how your going to dodge the fact that oil needs to be processed? By quoting some bull-shit and trying to apply it to a subject with no correlation?
Pretty weak.
I just don't feel like explaining the elementary concepts of what is blatantly obvious.
You get more energy out of the refinement process than you put in. That is only possible if there is already available potential energy stored in the input crude. Enough refined fuel exists to continue the process with a net gain in usable output.
Water does not have a net store of available chemical potential energy which can drive the process of electrolysis. If it did, you could build a perpetual motion machine capable of doing positive work. Back to the conservation of energy.
valfather. H2O into Hydrogen and oxygen.
So basically your saying that it can't be done profitably?
Tell these guys that. http://www.fuelcellenergy.com/
"While the need to ensure the availability of hydrogen has been seen as a concern in the operation of fuel cells, Direct FuelCells® (DFCs®) developed by FuelCell Energy, Inc. are unaffected by such limitations because they use natural gas and biofuels (gases from food processing and wastewater treatment)."
Natural gas is a fossil fuel. It is nonrenewable. Bio-fuels have only limited viability.
So who has natural gas?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_natural_gas_proven_reserves
1 Russia 47,570,000,000,000 25.02% 1 January 2010 est.
2 Iran 33,500,000,000,000 17.52% 1 January 2011 est.
3 Qatar 25,470,000,000,000 13.39% 1 January 2010 est.
4 Turkmenistan 7,504,000,000,000 3.95% 1 January 2010 est.
5 Saudi Arabia 7,461,000,000,000 3.92% 1 January 2010 est.
6 United States 6,928,000,000,000 3.64% 1 January 2010 est.
7 United Arab Emirates 6,071,000,000,000 3.19% 1 January 2010 est.
8 Nigeria 5,246,000,000,000 2.76% 1 January 2010 est.
Do I detect a pattern here?
That is only because the process of using hydrogen has not been more widely implemented. As more areas become involved, then the better more fully the hydrogen fuel will be used/utilized. It only needs participation to drive improvement, innovation and availability. Then you won't need to see natural gas used in the process.
I'm all for alternative fuels. Conservation is another key area for progress. Currently there are no viable alternatives to the fossil fuels we rely on. I've been staring down this devil for a long time.
Are you familiar with Mike Ruppert? I don't fully endorse his views, but he's not all wrong.
Mike Ruppert 2006 Predicts The Coming Economic Collapse Why Didn't The Media Tell You This
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXOVjpUIc6c
[Removed]
Divine Wind The History and Science of Hurricanes Kerry Emanuel
http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/AtmosphericScience/Meteorology/?view=usa&ci=9780195149418
Kerry Emanuel has been chosen as one of TIME Magazine's 100 People Who Shape Our World Named One of the Top Twenty Science Books of 2005 by Discover Magazine Description Imagine standing at the center of a Roman coliseum that is 20 miles across, with walls that soar 10 miles into the sky, towering walls with cascades of ice crystals falling along its brilliantly white surface. That's what it's like to stand in the eye of a hurricane. In Divine Wind, Kerry Emanuel, one of the world's leading authorities on hurricanes, gives us an engaging account of these awe-inspiring meteorological events, revealing how hurricanes and typhoons have literally altered human history, thwarting military incursions and changing the course of explorations. Offering an account of the physics of the tropical atmosphere, the author explains how such benign climates give rise to the most powerful storms in the world and tells what modern science has learned about them. Interwoven with this scientific account are descriptions of some of the most important hurricanes in history and relevant works of art and literature. For instance, he describes the 17th-century hurricane that likely inspired Shakespeare's The Tempest and that led to the British colonization of Bermuda. We also read about the Galveston Hurricane of 1900, by far the worst natural calamity in U.S. history, with a death toll between 8,000 and 12,000 that exceeded the San Francisco earthquake, the Johnstown Flood, and the Okeechobee Hurricane co Boasting more than one hundred color illustrations, frommbined. Boasting more than one hundred color illustrations, from ultra-modern Doppler imagery to classic paintings by Winslow Homer, Divine Wind captures the profound effects that hurricanes have had on humanity. Its fascinating blend of history, science, and art will appeal to weather junkies, science buffs, and everyone who read Isaac's Storm. Reviews
"A book this magnificent can only be the result of years of both scientific study and the collection of a propos materials." --THE KEY REPORTER
"Captures the awesome power of these monsters of the sea with the eye of an artist. The book includes more than 100 color illustrations, from hurricane tracking charts to classic paintings by Winslow Homer."--Good Housekeeping (Holiday Gift Pick)
"An attractive package of history, science and art, handsomely printed with more than 100 color illustrations: a coffee-table book of substance.... Hurricane Katrina has reminded us how inadequately prepared we all are to face the Big One. Perusing Divine Wind is one of many things you can do to get ready."--Houston Chronicle
"A fascinating tour of these tragic tempests.... Don't let the abundance of art, poetry and prose mislead--this is a serious volume too, ranging even to calculus for those willing to tackle a solid discussion of storm forecasting. The work can be understood without differential equations, but they are there for those who are interested, making this a well-balanced book for anyone with a desire to learn about hurricanes."--Associated Press
"Emanuel is a perfect example of the blending of what the late, great English author C.P. Snow called 'The Two Cultures': Science and the Humanities. We need more writers with his graceful handling of literature and painting to bring scientific subject matter to life.... This is a perceptive and important book that will repay constant rereading. I can't recommend it too strongly.... Beautiful and gutsy."--Bluefield.net
"The winds of nature's most powerful storm have altered history and blown through the human imagination for ages. Divine Wind puts the science of hurricanes alongside their cultural significance and in so doing makes for fascinating reading."--Dan Rather, CBS News
"An amazing read.... Emanuel offers a look at hurricanes not just as storms, but also as catalysts of change in our history, culture and geography."--Birmingham News
"Connoisseurs of natural disasters will devour Divine Wind, but I hope it finds its way into numerous school libraries, too. The author's gifts as a science teacher combine with a cultivated taste in folklore, literature and art. Divine Wind carries across the infamous two-culture gap, allowing the humanities and sciences to enhance each other."--Cleveland Plain Dealer
"The philosopher George Santayana observed that Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Kerry Emanuel reminds us of the tremendous impact that hurricanes have had on mankind since the thirteenth century. Today's coastal development along with hurricane amnesia places modern man on a collision course with catastrophe if the lessons of history are ignored."--Max Mayfield, Director, National Hurricane Center
"This book is almost sui generis--in-depth science combined with fine narrative history and a real appreciation of folklore and art. Kerry Emanuel has gone about as deep into his subject as it's possible to go, and the result is mandatory reading for anyone who's got the Weather Channel preset on their remotes."--Bill McKibben, author of The End of Nature and Wandering Home: A Long Walk Through America's Most Hopeful Region
"Until I read Divine Wind I had never found a book unique enough to contain the science and the history of hurricanes accented with the prose, songs and art about them. It provides fascinating accounts of notorious hurricanes that have changed history. With sound science it educates readers about how hurricanes form, how strong they can get, how they are tracked and what types of devastation they can cause. Both meteorologist and non-meteorologist will be captivated with it. I couldn't put the book down, anxious to absorb the next fascinating piece of hurricane history. Divine Wind is a must read for everyone interested in how hurricanes work, how they have molded coastal city history and how they have affected wars."--Dr. Steve Lyons, Hurricane Expert, The Weather Channel
"Professor Emanuel has elegantly synthesized what is known about the science of hurricanes, their effect on history, and their influence on the arts. A 'whirl-de-force' of information, Divine Wind will be of great interest to audiences as diverse as policy planners and connoisseurs of natural phenomena. All 'eyes' should be on this book." --Howard B. Bluestein, University of Oklahoma, author of Tornado Alley
"Emanuel interweaves scientific, historical, and cultural perspectives on these intense tropical cyclones."--Science Product Details 296 pages; 112 color halftones & maps, 90 b/w halftones & maps; 8-1/2 x 11; ISBN13: 978-0-19-514941-8ISBN10: 0-19-514941-6
Kerry Emanuel? Wow! That guy is The Man when it comes to hurricane science!
This whole issue of climate change is a huge food-fight. I piss everybody off. I am not convinced that the current climate change is attributable solely, mostly or at all, to human activity. I don't deny it. I just remain skeptical. The climate has changed continuously throughout the life of Earth.
Climate changes in the past appear to have been connected with terrestrial events such as volcanoes and ice dam breeches, etc. or extraterrestrial causes such as impacts by asteroids and fluctuations in solar intensity. It may be the case that we are currently experiencing a fluctuation in solar intensity.
For me, I can cite reputable scientists on both sides of the dispute without contradiction. That's how science works. There's a gray area where evidence and models don't provide all the answers.
As if that won't piss people off enough, then I argue that global warming might not be all that bad for us. Again, I could be wrong, but in the past when the planet was warmer, it was also lusher. It's possible that warming the planet might have a positive long-term effect on agricultural productivity. It seems probable that it will raise the overall quantity of fresh water in the hydrological cycle. That doesn't mean everybody will win. People who rely on snow-melt that no longer occurs will need to change their way of life.
Now that I've really got people riled up, I throw in the argument that it doesn't really matter all that much because we are going to consume the Earth's store of fossil fuels in a few brief centuries, and then the atmosphere will no longer be subject to our excess hydrocarbon pollution.
The the fun begin!
BTW I was talking about the threat of anthropogenic global warming back in the 1980s, before Al Gore ever heard of it.
Was that the fun or the the fun?
I just find it amusing how much hostility people bring to a scientific debate. If I took it too seriously, I would go mad. I especially like the way "Liberals" react to any questioning of the gospel of anthropogenic climate change.
I happen to believe the continuing global population explosion is far more destructive to the planet than global warming. Got a solution for that one?
Yes, yes I do. Wanna hear it?
Go for it.
Within the United States:
We are going to stop all funding from tax dollars for charities that operate in other countries that do not include birth control such as condoms. That one is my favorite. We are going to stop all funding from countries that do not allow family planning services.
But, you see, none of that solves the problem of the impact on our resources. Does it?
No. Fracking and the dumping of chemicals directly into water supplies in other countries does. Birth control does not stop any of that. Nor does it have one thing to do with destroying rain forests. Does the birth of a baby effect the emissions from oil refineries? Nope. So, if 2.5 trillion dollars worth of environmental damage is done a year by those same companies then birth control doesn't really have anything to do with it.
:D
The traditional population of the US is already shrinking. Immigration and birthrates of recent immigrants is by far the biggest contributor to US population growth.
"Does the birth of a baby effect the emissions from oil refineries?" Does the birth of a million babies lead to a higher rate of consumption? I'll answer that one for you. YES.
"Provide Federal funding for Project Prevention or organizations that will pay drug addicts to undergo sterilization. Men and Women." Hey, then we can get the CIA to pump even more drugs into poor and minority neighborhoods! Do you realize how sick your proposed "solution" sounds?
"The traditional population of the US is already shrinking. Immigration and birthrates of recent immigrants is by far the biggest contributor to US population growth."
And in Germany Point?
From the top Does the birth of a baby effect the emissions from oil refineries?
Hey, then we can get the CIA to pump even more drugs into poor and minority neighborhoods! Do you realize how sick your proposed "solution" sounds?
I'll tell you what. You go read some books and then get back to me when you have an argument. k?
My point is that attempting to control the population via birth control isn't going to do much if reproduction of the native population is not the cause of population growth. I am opposed to the massive flood of immigrants, not because I don't like the people coming in. It's because we are staring down the barrel of a looming resource depletion and quite possibly an ecological disruption.
Many parts of the US are consuming more fresh water than nature replaces. Especially hard hit are the parts of the country where many of the recent immigrants have moved to. If you look at other parts of the planet, especially places with rapidly increasing populations, the living conditions are abysmal. If current trends continue, we will end up with the US being on a par with Mexico City with a few rich bankers living in castles on the hilltops.
Hmmmm...that is interesting.
So, just so we are clear..........there is no global warming occurring and man has nothing to do with it. It's all about .................immigration. Is there any particular group that you might have in mind? It can't be hispanics and it sure can't be Native Americans.
I see you are twisting things around, ready to set me up with a charge of "RACIST".
"there is no global warming occurring and man has nothing to do with it" Where have I said that, or anything that a reasonable mind could construe as applying that?
Who me?
Right now, I am just listening to you roll it out. If you think that you can further explain it then do so now.
Read my other posts in this thread. I already address your question.
You don't have an argument.
[Removed]
FFS, you are one stooooooopid tool.
[Removed]
Is that the best you can come up with, you sick fuck?
Thats john again. I'm waiting for him to sign back into one of his other user names to get my replies.
Is it? Oh, John Bassist is a son of bitch.
The Obama Deception http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7886780711843120756
[Removed]
[Removed]
Oh shut up.
[Removed]
There was no Climategate. The scam was biased reporting by the oil industry shills.
[Removed]
Bad try and go away.
No Profile Information
Private Messages
send message
Information
Joined Jan. 14, 2012
Too much of a chicken shit to stay with one alt. You weak piece of shift. Don't waste my time, little boy.
[Removed]
John, your a douche bag. Your messages were probably collapsed because you are a douche bag. Get it now, douche bag?
[Removed]
that's horrible, maybe she should get a body guard. But i think the climate science is politicized and both sides of the debate are acting badly. Interesting that she was a marxist, but that does fit the pattern.
So were Republican's in the 60s :/
Wow, nasty emails, at least we only do light hearted stuff like sending the SEIU to bankers houses and scaring their 14 year old kid half to death, nope, none of those nasty emails for us!
So,,,,,, Algore was telling a lie. There actually IS a debate. I thought there was nobody against global warming. Guess you are all wrong.
Real scientists question global warming. Yes. Reasonable and reputable scientist do believe the matter is still open to question.
Thursday, September 15, 2011 2:57 AM EDT
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/214181/20110915/ivar-giaever-global-warming-climate-change-al-gore-ipcc-hoax-dissent-nobel-prize-winner-physicist-re.htm
Nobel Laureate Ivar Giaever Quits Physics Group over Stand on Global Warming
By IBTimes Staff Reporter
Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever resigned as a Fellow from the American Physical Society Tuesday, condemning the group's official stand on global warming.
In 2007, the APS adopted an official statement that emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities were changing the atmosphere in ways that affected the Earth's climate.
"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring," the APS stated. "If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now."
Giaever, an 82-year-old Norwegian, sent an e-mail to APS official Kate Kirby announcing his abrupt resignation. He said he "cannot live with the statement" on global warming, and said that global temperature had been "amazingly stable."
Climate Depot, a site that questions manmade global warming, said it has obtained a copy of the letter.
In his resignation note, Giaever wrote: "In the APS, it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?"
"The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period."
Giaever, co-winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1973, is an institute professor emeritus at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y., a professor-at-large at the University of Oslo, and the president of Applied BioPhysics Inc.
According to a Wall Street Journal report, Giaever declared himself a dissenter in 2008, "I am a skeptic... Global warming has become a new religion."
"I am Norwegian, should I really worry about a little bit of warming? I am unfortunately becoming an old man. We have heard many similar warnings about the acid rain 30 years ago and the ozone hole 10 years ago or deforestation but the humanity is still around. The ozone hole width has peaked in 1993," he continued.
"Moreover, global warming has become a new religion. We frequently hear about the number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don't really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money," he added.
Giaever is one of the most prominent scientists named in the 2007 Minority Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (updated in 2009) originally citing support of 400 "dissenting scientists", and growing to 700. He was also one of more than 100 co-signers in a March 30, 2009, letter to President Barack Obama which criticized his stance on global warming.
[Removed]
Here is some good reading http://www.theblaze.com/stories/music-program-now-admits-to-being-behind-occupy-lyrics-in-third-graders-song/
Ya this canary was also caught up in the email scam along with other fraud scientist http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2011/11/24/pro-science-pushback-helps-put-release-of-second-batch-of-climate-scientist-emails-in-perspective/
She must be one of the evil Corporate 1%'ers. OWS must have targeted her,this is modus operandi for OWS.
I'am SHOCKED you can't believe that.
where are these haters -
I hate these haters
I want to hate them to their face.
the fuckers
[Removed]
I think it is a very cowardly act. I want them to show their faces.
[Removed]
You ding bat. Go play with your blow up dolls.
[Removed]
That's exactly what it is - they don't like the message - so they attack the messenger.
. . . anonymously . . . .
fuckin cowards.
Yep, big and bad behind the screen.
I hope the fuckers are caught
Me, too.
Oooh tough guy. Climate scientist busted a long time ago hahahahahha http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2011/11/24/pro-science-pushback-helps-put-release-of-second-batch-of-climate-scientist-emails-in-perspective/
I wonder if Kerry Emanuel was one of those climate gate scientist that got wrapped up in the email fraud scam????? Remember the climate gate scientist had their email accounts hacked and they were busted for lying about Global warming. You know "fudging" the numbers
No one fudged numbers. NO scientists lied about climate change. This has been proven time and time and time and time and time again. "Climategate" was a deliberate misrepresentation perpetrated by the oil industry shills.
The Obama Deception http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7886780711843120756
Sanitarium's Sweater vests. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-santorum-sweater-vests-20120112,0,498009.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fnews%2Fpolitics+%28L.A
The fear and hate of the fossil fuel empire and it's supporters is coming to light more and more. We need to change our fuel base and they are getting frantic.
Agreed. I think people should be screaming this from the top of their lungs. If for no other reason than to possibly get them to back off.
It's starting to happen and that is why fossil fuel is getting so frantic.
Hu? You mean why they are mucking things up in Nigeria? The only thing I see happening is an effort to consolidate control of resources.
There is no viable, cost-effective alternative to fossil fuels currently available. Petroleum is still "black gold". It's even better than gold for those who sell it, since it is a consumable commodity.
Start from the top of the Post. Then insert comment. Yes Nigeria is a new and up-coming mess. It is also another poster child for getting off of fossil fuel.
Nigeria is not a new mess. The Oil barons have been destabilizing Nigeria for a long time now.
It's a new mess in that it is now starting to get public attention in coverage by the Corporate Media.
The "clash of civilizations" (war on civilization) is now being marketed to black America, I guess. Gotta make them feel as if they have a stake in this insanity as well.
Caesar explained the strategy of pitting opposing factions against one another in order to pilfer their resources. Nothing new in this.
What is trying to be marketed is the ( supposed need ) to support and protect the fossil fuel empire. It is another attempt at distracting attention away from the need to change our fuel base.
You seem to think the petroleum industry feels such pressure. Their goal is to wrest control of the natural resources of the planet. If Nigeria, Iraq, Libya, Iran, etc. are stable, the people of those nations will cooperate to ensure they keep control over their resources.
The value of fossil fuels will continue to rise. You're pissing into the wind of you think otherwise.
Again the point of this Post, that we are commenting on. The fossil fuel industry is starting to piss their pants. Why? Because people are beginning to wake up to the fact that the global climate is being affected by fossil fuel use, and the fact that the Public is also beginning to realize that there are real alternatives available to begin taking the place of fossil fuel. Not just to stem green house gasses either, but to also stop poisoning our world.
Hence the hate attacks against climate scientists.
Do you really believe the oil industry had any direct involvement in the attacks against Emanuel? I certainly don't. It's just a bunch of partisan puppets acting on what they have been brainwashed into believing.
The need for the kinds of energy and other products provided by petroleum and other fossil fuel sources is growing. Currently there are no viable alternatives available. The fossil fuel companies are not the ones who are going to take a hit if consumption is linked with a "carbon tax".
As a matter of fact, they will probably find a way to tap into those very revenues.
No they will pass on a carbon tax to the consumer.
What they are afraid of ( and they are very capable of supporting/coordinating attacks on private citizens and scientific institutions ) - what they are afraid of is the rise of Hydrogen Fuel for all forms of transportation as well as for generating electricity and for use in heating and cooling industry. They are afraid that there will be growing bans on the use of fossil fuel's.
Hydrogen Fuel? How are you going to get the hydrogen?
You process it from water. You could begin with setting up processing on offshore platforms and process sea/ocean water. You could use wind power in the beginning for the electricity, they could probably convert to burning hydrogen as the process develops. Solar power could also provide electricity for the process. There are even things called tidal generators that use the rise and fall of tides to generate electricity.
Forward environmental change.
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/keystone_sotu/?id=33678-4904244-%3Dxzka6x&t=7
Here is a place where you can directly address change. Take part, it does not hurt and may very well heal/help. Forward the cause of reform and rebirth.
http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ag8nw/zL2Q/B18Bb