tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post4949524348260856838..comments2023-07-06T08:47:49.421-05:00Comments on Leavenworth Street - the talk of Nebraska politics: Piping upStreet Sweeperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04829434036913451764noreply@blogger.comBlogger99125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-83289700904934529772010-12-12T19:57:40.079-06:002010-12-12T19:57:40.079-06:00Shoey,
Nice to see that you're already changi...Shoey,<br /><br />Nice to see that you're already changing your tune on the scientific community. A couple of more posts and we'll have you working for Haliburton.<br /><br />The difference is that your side's religion IS environmentalism, with cherry-picked stats to "prove" your case.<br /><br />Preach to your own choir. They eat up your stuff.Street Sweeperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04829434036913451764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-1768072223346077172010-12-12T19:38:40.418-06:002010-12-12T19:38:40.418-06:00SS - Id rather be transparent than duplicitous as ...SS - Id rather be transparent than duplicitous as you are. My point was the irony of you using science to make the case for anything since you are part of the right wing conspiracy that has spent recent years undermining science.<br /><br />I do, in fact, have the correspondence. Unlike you, I've read the so called "Climate gate" emails. out of thousands there were fewer than a Shoe Salesmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-3714388919277691322010-12-09T11:25:00.591-06:002010-12-09T11:25:00.591-06:00I know for a fact that 99% of scientists believe w...I know for a fact that 99% of scientists believe what you assert is false.<br /><br />There! Magic assertions!<br /><br />What you're even coming up with is such BS it's barely worth replying to. There is very little that you can get 99% of scientists -- let alone anyone else -- to "agree on".<br /><br />Well, except for Earth-flatness. Or the speed of sound. Or computer sizeStreet Sweeperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04829434036913451764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-79991288357789269592010-12-09T11:16:16.310-06:002010-12-09T11:16:16.310-06:00Yeah, the 99% of global warming scientists are all...Yeah, the 99% of global warming scientists are all fudging data in a grand conspiracy to convince us that mankind is causing global warming. It's an irrefutable physical law of thermodynamics that if you add carbon dioxide to a closed system, more heat will be retained. Occam's Razor please.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-33798181301434828392010-12-09T10:04:04.527-06:002010-12-09T10:04:04.527-06:00Shoey,
Yup, and you have all that correspondence ...Shoey,<br /><br />Yup, and you have all that correspondence that shows there was no fudging those global warming numbers either right?<br /><br />Interesting that this whole pipeline fight went from, "the pipeline isn't safe" to "tar sand oil causes global warming!".<br /><br />You guys are transparent.<br /><br />SSStreet Sweeperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04829434036913451764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-86773702413662278332010-12-09T09:56:42.221-06:002010-12-09T09:56:42.221-06:00The greatest irony in this post is Sweeper's i...The greatest irony in this post is Sweeper's insistence that we all "listen to the scientists" when Sweeper and the other anti-science folks that populate this blog also insist on ignoring the "science" on climate change. Here we have one scientist sweeper quotes out of context. On Climate Change we have thousands of scientists - 99% of scientists in the field - in Shoe Salesmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-65219320428944603922010-12-07T09:47:40.985-06:002010-12-07T09:47:40.985-06:00GH, you are so full of it. I did not post unsuppor...GH, you are so full of it. I did not post unsupported assertions and gave you the name of a scientist who is studying this issue. Your earlier posts tried to minimize the issue of damage caused by the BP oil spill and tried to convince others that "bugs ate it" as if this completely solved the damage caused by the spill. In your last post you point out that the fertilizer caused dead Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-14784306964039553672010-12-06T23:05:53.901-06:002010-12-06T23:05:53.901-06:00` GH, it would take you all of 30 seconds using th...`<i> GH, it would take you all of 30 seconds using the Google to find out that the 7,000 square mile dead zone caused by fertilizer runoff is mainly in shallow waters of the Gulf. The BP spill area is not in this zone. </i><br /><br />Well, gee, I suggest you google 'reuters dead zone bp oil spill'. In the first link from reuters, you will find that, according to the scientists who Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-2240151550642588222010-12-06T16:22:37.216-06:002010-12-06T16:22:37.216-06:00GH, it would take you all of 30 seconds using the ...GH, it would take you all of 30 seconds using the Google to find out that the 7,000 square mile dead zone caused by fertilizer runoff is mainly in shallow waters of the Gulf. The BP spill area is not in this zone. This is a fact that contradicts your assertion. Seems that my <i>aspersions about your scientific lack of objectivity</i> are being backed up by your posts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-35023507171678299432010-12-06T15:51:57.470-06:002010-12-06T15:51:57.470-06:00I know all about the dead zone caused by fertilize...<i>I know all about the dead zone caused by fertilizer runoff, GH.</i><br /><br />Then why did you claim an 80 sq. mile dead zone from the spill, when in reality there's a >7,000 sq. mile annual dead zone there, as there has been (more or less) for the last 20 years, and the scientists who have been studying the dead zone over an extended period say there's no way of telling how the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-1657161505061933932010-12-06T15:14:32.438-06:002010-12-06T15:14:32.438-06:00I know all about the dead zone caused by fertilize...I know all about the dead zone caused by fertilizer runoff, GH. So the dead zone surrounding the BP spill site had nothing to do with the oil? That's some objective thinking! Dr. Joye (the one you are convinced is biased) took core samples and found oil only at the top indicating she is not seeing natural seepage. Must have been biased samples. I know that your ideology forces you to minimizeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-14148850493850101382010-12-06T13:45:21.581-06:002010-12-06T13:45:21.581-06:00Anonymous Coward @10:09. There's a dead zone E...Anonymous Coward @10:09. There's a dead zone EVERY year in the central Gulf. Fertilizer use (including that from corn-based ethanol production) flows into the Gulf from the Mississippi, causes eutrophication, and as a result an oxygen-free zone.<br /><br />The dead zone area this year is over 7000 square miles, far larger than the BP dead zone you're claiming, and it completely contains Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-15171638429045804072010-12-06T13:34:43.575-06:002010-12-06T13:34:43.575-06:00You got that, Gerard?! You're not allowed to ...You got that, Gerard?! You're not allowed to compare apples to oranges! Only Jane Kleeb and her liberal ilk can compare apples to oranges!!!Grundle Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10748007604078024036noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-52429372492837213212010-12-06T10:09:07.949-06:002010-12-06T10:09:07.949-06:00GH, there is an 80 square mile dead zone. Any ideo...GH, there is an 80 square mile dead zone. Any ideological bias will not affect that observation. Sure, there is a natural seepage of oil on the Gulf floor, but it is not concentrated in both area and time as the BP spill was. You're trying to compare apples and oranges. If you are so sure that "biases can affect views" then I hope you realize this is also true of a certain chemistryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-64980294468984177372010-12-04T19:23:16.758-06:002010-12-04T19:23:16.758-06:00Dear Sweeps -
You have made me so very, very hap...Dear Sweeps - <br /><br />You have made me so very, very happy by opening up the subject of the Keystone XL, whereby The Janiac can barf up all of her nonsense and be held to much public ridicule. Because she cannot help herself, because...She's a Janiaaac, Janiaaac on the floor, and she's dan.... Oh. Sorry.<br /> <br />Also, I am very pleased to see that Mr. Holland might cut off her Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-81904794110217242672010-12-04T17:04:53.843-06:002010-12-04T17:04:53.843-06:00I think her views on oil drilling probably do affe...I think her views on oil drilling probably do affect her views on the environmental damage, yes. You base your expectation of long lasting environmental damage on what? Given the Gulf naturally seeps a whole lot of oil, why would you expect this event to have unusual consequences, especially given other scientists observing the site don't report substantial long lasting effects?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-79644928755734931812010-12-04T14:32:27.850-06:002010-12-04T14:32:27.850-06:00Anon 2:22- It's "than", not "th...Anon 2:22- It's "than", not "then", Einstein.<br /><br />Otherwise, kudos for a great post.<br /><br />(Seriously.)<br /><br />(What? I'm being sincere.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-46437815349358687772010-12-04T14:14:26.661-06:002010-12-04T14:14:26.661-06:00Bye-bye soon-to-be-former Mayor SuttleBye-bye soon-to-be-former Mayor SuttleAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-88909692225512741572010-12-04T12:10:55.745-06:002010-12-04T12:10:55.745-06:009:35 p.m.
See Dick
See Jane
See Dick write checks...9:35 p.m. <br />See Dick<br />See Jane<br />See Dick write checks<br />See Jane talk<br />See Dick write more checks<br />See Jane talk<br />See Dick stop writing checks<br />See Malinda on unemployment<br />Who's Malinda?<br />Doesn't matter, see Jane land on feet<br />See Jane call Warren<br />See a pattern?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-12510648736163756632010-12-04T12:04:20.160-06:002010-12-04T12:04:20.160-06:00Miles/feet.
Iceberg/Goldberg.Miles/feet.<br />Iceberg/Goldberg.Street Sweeperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04829434036913451764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-62553346829135901712010-12-04T11:48:56.889-06:002010-12-04T11:48:56.889-06:00Good point, Roger. Any deeper and it would have b...Good point, Roger. Any deeper and it would have been easier just to ask the Chinese to plug it.Scott Lautenbaughnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-56175354118816487642010-12-04T11:30:23.066-06:002010-12-04T11:30:23.066-06:00The BP well is 5,000 miles beneath the sea? Isn...The BP well is 5,000 <i>miles</i> beneath the sea? Isn't that approaching the Earths' core or something?Roger Snowdenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10672154606856548431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-35554838716249885782010-12-04T10:53:47.242-06:002010-12-04T10:53:47.242-06:008:42, let me explain a fact of life to you. Corpor...8:42, let me explain a fact of life to you. Corporations and their management have a prime directive to maximize profits. Unfortunately the market's judgment skews to the short-term, not long-term. Like BP, short-cuts are often rationalized because of the profit push. No one expected the rig to blow, but cut enough corners and the result is an unplanned, unexpected disaster.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-47386498340381105712010-12-04T10:47:08.458-06:002010-12-04T10:47:08.458-06:00GH at 10:31, does her view on society's demand...GH at 10:31, does her view on society's demand for oil and gas have anything to do with her observations near the spill site? Did it change her vision? Some of us are able to make rational, unbiased observations and derive conclusions from them without letting ideology completely twist our findings, sometimes to the opposite of the truth. As a chemistry professor I would hope this is true forAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21100730.post-76329282411456153072010-12-04T08:42:33.205-06:002010-12-04T08:42:33.205-06:00Farmers spew tons of poisonous fertilizer onto the...Farmers spew tons of poisonous fertilizer onto the land above the aquafer because that brings them millions of dollars in crops.<br /><br />Oil companies have millions of dollars worth of oil that they aren't about to throw away.<br /><br />So, Kleeb is telling us what? That oil companies are eager to lose money? That if they have a ruptured pipeline they have to do something other than Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com