Waukesha County, Republican pols failed to kill it.
The Calatrava Addition to the Milwaukee Art Museum
Sunset on the lakefront, summer 2018
Milwaukee River empties into Lake Michigan
Wisconsin wind farm, east of Waupun
86 turbines overcame Walker's blockade
Skylight illumination in Milwaukee City Hall
The historic 19th-century building has stone floors, copper decoration, and iron work by the famous artisan Cyril Kolnic. Stop in and walk around.
What water, wetland protection is all about
"A little fill here and there may seem to be nothing to become excited about. But one fill, though comparatively inconsequential, may lead to another, and another, and before long a great body may be eaten away until it may no longer exist. Our navigable waters are a precious natural heritage, once gone, they disappear forever," wrote the Wisconsin Supreme Court in its 1960 opinion resolving Hixon v. PSC and buttressing The Public Trust Doctrine, Article IX of the Wisconsin State Constitution.
Lake Michigan in winter
James Rowen's Bio
James Rowen is an independent writer based in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He worked as the senior Mayoral staffer in Madison and Milwaukee and for newspapers in both cities. This blog began on 2/2/ 2007.
Oh, no doubt... none... NONE.
So let me see if I get this correct . . .
The Washington Post organizes a "Planet Panel" of people who all support the concept of man->CO2->Global Warming and are either directly or in-directly involved (ie benefit from) with the Global Warming/Environmental/Industrial complex and surprise surprise - they all say there can be no doubt about man->CO2->Global Warming.
Isn't that called a self-fulfilling prophesy James?
And btw - did you actually read what they had to say - somehow these auspicious eggheads do not know the difference between theory and fact.
CO2 levels have continued to rise the last decade yet temps have not and are not expected to for the next 30 to 40 years because of the SUN. Mayhaps the activity level of the sun is the single most important factor?
And even if there is an overall long term rise in temps - isn't that what has been going on since the end of the last ice-age?
As is often the case, sadly here we have a group of people here who do not realize what they do not know.
What are your anonymous respondents' alternatives? Are they claiming that humans burning through billions of years of a sequestered carbon in the form of oil, gas and coal has no effect whatsoever? Are the claiming that the spectral absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide does not prevent the radiation of infra-red light (AKA heat) into space? How about claiming that 95% of the geologist have it wrong when they interpret geological evidence regarding correlations between CO2 levels and temperature?
If any group is selective in who it wants to listen to, it is the the people in denial. Exxon and the Koch brothers purchase scientists every day to support their ideas. The real proof is in the fact that big oil and king coal can only buy a small minority of scientist. Some scientist have ethics; they hold the fate of the earth as more valuable than a big fat research grant.
Joe - did not realize Geologists (ie scientists who study of the solid and liquid matter that constitutes the Earth) are considered to be the final authority on Climatology.
Thought that was the purview of the Climatologists.
One other thing - even if there is a correlation between CO2 levels and tempature - that does not equate to a cause & effect.
Higher CO2 levels might simply be the effect, a symptom if you will, of higher temps and in no way the cause.
Climate denier's silliness on climate change is on full display with Anon Jim's comments. He could win the Special Verbal Olympics with his expertise in conclusion jumping.
The same baseless grasping for anything to support their own beliefs is a hallmark of the fools on the right. I call it the Twizler effect - when someone has no facts to use directly to support their opinions, they have to twist it to the point where it looks like a licorice rope.
Remember, its not worth arguing with the deniers using real facts. Why? Because they don't care about facts. They'll do exactly what Anon Jim does on this site. It's like arguing over the bible or cartoons or whether one color is prettier than another. Irrelevant and wasteful of one's time.
Too bad the climate change deniers will benefit from controls on CO2 just like the rest of us. If we could isolate them from the benefits of sound environmental policies, they wouldn't be able to spew their moronic BS while getting a free ride on the work the rest of us are doing to slow the buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Someone once said "Do you believe what you see or do you see what you believe?"
Could not have said it better CB - you Chicken Little's of Global Warming (oh wait - that right you had to change to "Climate Change" when it got just too embarrassing when the facts got in the way) see exactly what they want to see regardless of the facts. And sorry but no matter how much you spin it, theories ain't facts.
No wonder the Gore-acle will not and can not ever debate these issues. All those tricky facts get in the way of him counting his untold millions he is scamming off this idiocy.
And how exactly are you going to reduce CO2 levels even if you implement your economy-wrecking cap and tax scheme, when India and China are going to be exempted?
Post a Comment