Comments on: Will Blocking Keystone XL Increase GHG Emissions? http://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/ Climate Change News & Analysis Thu, 07 Feb 2013 05:41:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Jim Guirardhttp://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-66030 Jim Guirard Tue, 22 Nov 2011 00:59:24 +0000 http://www.globalwarming.org/?p=11268#comment-66030 The illogic and self-contradictions of the anti-XL Pipeline activists are in fact a cultic disorder of major proportions -- many of whose roots and lock-step Left influences can be found in Walter Martin's and Ravi Zacharias' definitive, award-winning 2003 book, "Kingdom of the Cults:"1. Leadership by a self-glorifying, manipulative New Age Prophet -- in this case, former Vice-President Al Gore, though he has now been virtually supplanted by President Barack Obama.2. Assertion of an apocalyptic threat to all mankind, in this case CO2.3. An absolutist definition of both the threat and the proposed solution(s).4. Promise of a salvation from this pending apocalypse.5. Devotion to an inspired text which (arguendo) embodies all the answers -- in this case, Prophet Gore's pseudo-scientific book "Earth in the Balance" and his more recent "An Inconvenient Truth" documentary.6. A specific list of "truths" or de facto "commandments" which must be embraced and proselytized by all Cult members..7. An absolute intolerance of any deviation from any of these truths by any Cult member.8. A strident intolerance of any outside criticism of the Cult's definition of the problem or of its proposed solutions.9. A "Heaven-on-Earth" vision of the results of the mission's success and/or a "Hell-on-Earth" result if the cultic mission should fail.10. An inordinate fear (and an outright rejection of the possibility) of being proven wrong in either the apocalyptic vision or the proposed salvation.Is it any wonder that it is quite impossible to "talk logic" to such pseudo-religious zealots -- whether it be about the XL Pipeline or any other environmental issue, and where any challenge to their beliefs is quite literally regarded as a heresy?JIM GUIRARD -- Truespeak.org Justcauses@aol.com The illogic and self-contradictions of the anti-XL Pipeline activists are in fact a cultic disorder of major proportions — many of whose roots and lock-step Left influences can be found in Walter Martin’s and Ravi Zacharias’ definitive, award-winning 2003 book, “Kingdom of the Cults:”

1. Leadership by a self-glorifying, manipulative New Age Prophet — in this case, former Vice-President Al Gore, though he has now been virtually supplanted by President Barack Obama.

2. Assertion of an apocalyptic threat to all mankind, in this case CO2.

3. An absolutist definition of both the threat and the proposed solution(s).

4. Promise of a salvation from this pending apocalypse.

5. Devotion to an inspired text which (arguendo) embodies all the answers — in this case, Prophet Gore’s pseudo-scientific book “Earth in the Balance” and his more recent “An Inconvenient Truth” documentary.

6. A specific list of “truths” or de facto “commandments” which must be embraced and proselytized by all Cult members..

7. An absolute intolerance of any deviation from any of these truths by any Cult member.

8. A strident intolerance of any outside criticism of the Cult’s definition of the problem or of its proposed solutions.

9. A “Heaven-on-Earth” vision of the results of the mission’s success and/or a “Hell-on-Earth” result if the cultic mission should fail.

10. An inordinate fear (and an outright rejection of the possibility) of being proven wrong in either the apocalyptic vision or the proposed salvation.

Is it any wonder that it is quite impossible to “talk logic” to such pseudo-religious zealots — whether it be about the XL Pipeline or any other environmental issue, and where any challenge to their beliefs is quite literally regarded as a heresy?

JIM GUIRARD — Truespeak.org Justcauses@aol.com

]]> By: Alzeyyazzasfjklajhttp://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-66002 Alzeyyazzasfjklaj Mon, 21 Nov 2011 15:15:45 +0000 http://www.globalwarming.org/?p=11268#comment-66002 True True

]]> By: Alzeyyazzasfjklajhttp://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-66001 Alzeyyazzasfjklaj Mon, 21 Nov 2011 15:15:19 +0000 http://www.globalwarming.org/?p=11268#comment-66001 yo yo

]]> By: wilbert merel robichaudhttp://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-65968 wilbert merel robichaud Sat, 19 Nov 2011 13:54:33 +0000 http://www.globalwarming.org/?p=11268#comment-65968 As long as we use oil our society will keep on evolving forward and that alone does not jive to well with these anti freedom & science challenged groups. How can they return us to the Stone Age if we keep rejecting their inefficient tax payer funded wind mills, Solar panels or overprice electric cars?" We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects…. We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres of presently settled land. David Foreman, Earth First!" They Claim the Sand Hills are too environmentally sensitive to have a pipe line disturb the land. Yet! not a peep against the wind mills farms peppering the landscape of these once beautiful sand hills. As long as we use oil our society will keep on evolving forward and that alone does not jive to well with these anti freedom & science challenged groups. How can they return us to the Stone Age if we keep rejecting their inefficient tax payer funded wind mills, Solar panels or overprice electric cars?” We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects…. We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres of presently settled land. David Foreman, Earth First!”
They Claim the Sand Hills are too environmentally sensitive to have a pipe line disturb the land. Yet! not a peep against the wind mills farms peppering the landscape of these once beautiful sand hills.

]]> By: PeterB in Indianapolishttp://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-65925 PeterB in Indianapolis Thu, 17 Nov 2011 19:58:04 +0000 http://www.globalwarming.org/?p=11268#comment-65925 I find it hilarious that wind farms have killed more endangered birds than have ever been killed by all recorded oil spills combined. I also find it hilarious that solar panels and wind turbines use so much energy and rare earth (toxic) metals in their manufacture, that they have an absolutely HUGE carbon footprint. I also find it ridiculously funny that people like 350.org here never seem to mention that all wind farms and solar facilities REQUIRE backup generators powered by either coal or natural gas, and that a LARGE percentage of the time, power is actually supplied by the backup generators and not the "alternate" energy source at all! Last winter in England, when it was the absolute coldest and people needed abundant, cheap energy the most, British Government studies showed that the wind farms were operating at a whopping 5% of capacity.... I find it hilarious that wind farms have killed more endangered birds than have ever been killed by all recorded oil spills combined. I also find it hilarious that solar panels and wind turbines use so much energy and rare earth (toxic) metals in their manufacture, that they have an absolutely HUGE carbon footprint. I also find it ridiculously funny that people like 350.org here never seem to mention that all wind farms and solar facilities REQUIRE backup generators powered by either coal or natural gas, and that a LARGE percentage of the time, power is actually supplied by the backup generators and not the “alternate” energy source at all! Last winter in England, when it was the absolute coldest and people needed abundant, cheap energy the most, British Government studies showed that the wind farms were operating at a whopping 5% of capacity….

]]> By: PeterB in Indianapolishttp://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-65924 PeterB in Indianapolis Thu, 17 Nov 2011 19:52:34 +0000 http://www.globalwarming.org/?p=11268#comment-65924 Jimmy C. Goode,I don't know if you "true believers" get it either. Canada is going to develop tar sands oil. It ALREADY has developed it, and will continue to do so. Canada is also going to sell this oil to SOMEONE. It is better economically AND environmentally, that that SOMEONE be the United States as opposed to China.Until you figure that out, you will continue to favor stupid policies which actually increase the amount of CO2 emitted by humans on a global scale, just as you do in this case. Your position on this issue contradicts your stated goals, which is unsurprising.Perhaps you should listen to Fred Singer (and other people like Roger Pielke) instead of Muller who has already admitted that the BEST study did not even study the purported human impact on the global temperature record?http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/why_best_will_not_settle_the_climate_debate.html Jimmy C. Goode,

I don’t know if you “true believers” get it either. Canada is going to develop tar sands oil. It ALREADY has developed it, and will continue to do so. Canada is also going to sell this oil to SOMEONE. It is better economically AND environmentally, that that SOMEONE be the United States as opposed to China.

Until you figure that out, you will continue to favor stupid policies which actually increase the amount of CO2 emitted by humans on a global scale, just as you do in this case. Your position on this issue contradicts your stated goals, which is unsurprising.

Perhaps you should listen to Fred Singer (and other people like Roger Pielke) instead of Muller who has already admitted that the BEST study did not even study the purported human impact on the global temperature record?

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/why_best_will_not_settle_the_climate_debate.html

]]> By: Block Keystone XL to reduce CO2 emissions? Fail! | JunkScience.comhttp://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-65912 Block Keystone XL to reduce CO2 emissions? Fail! | JunkScience.com Thu, 17 Nov 2011 05:59:32 +0000 http://www.globalwarming.org/?p=11268#comment-65912 [...] Will Blocking Keystone XL Increase GHG Emissions? – Last week, after three years of environmental review, public meetings, and public comment, President Obama postponed until first quarter 2013 a decision on whether or not to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline — the $7 billion, shovel-ready project to deliver up to 830,000 barrels a day of tar sands oil from Canada to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. Obama’s punt, which Keystone opponents hope effectively kills the pipeline, is topic-of-the-week on National Journal’s Energy Experts Blog. So far, a dozen ”experts” have posted, including yours truly. [...] [...] Will Blocking Keystone XL Increase GHG Emissions? – Last week, after three years of environmental review, public meetings, and public comment, President Obama postponed until first quarter 2013 a decision on whether or not to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline — the $7 billion, shovel-ready project to deliver up to 830,000 barrels a day of tar sands oil from Canada to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. Obama’s punt, which Keystone opponents hope effectively kills the pipeline, is topic-of-the-week on National Journal’s Energy Experts Blog. So far, a dozen ”experts” have posted, including yours truly. [...]

]]> By: Jimmy C Goodehttp://www.globalwarming.org/2011/11/16/will-blocking-keystone-xl-increase-ghg-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-65910 Jimmy C Goode Wed, 16 Nov 2011 23:21:47 +0000 http://www.globalwarming.org/?p=11268#comment-65910 The main thrust of your article is that it will be "BETTER" for the environment to process this "unconventional" tar oil using the XL Keystone Pipeline, besause of the "smaller carbon footprint". This Alberta Tar Oil will "only" contribute 1% to carbon emissions is another point you present. Well, the message of 350.org is we can NOT develop "unconventional" oil resources for the sake of our present climate. By approving this project it sets the pace to "invest" in these energy sources and ignore alternate energy. By building this infrastructure it will like have a capital life of 25 plus years and encourage more projects like this to take hold. I'm not sure if you deniers "get it" perhaps listening to Dr. Richard Muller will do it:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/15/-ex-skeptic-richard-muller-congress-global-warming_n_1094966.html The main thrust of your article is that it will be “BETTER” for the environment to process this “unconventional” tar oil using the XL Keystone Pipeline, besause of the “smaller carbon footprint”. This Alberta Tar Oil will “only” contribute 1% to carbon emissions is another point you present.
Well, the message of 350.org is we can NOT develop “unconventional” oil resources for the sake of our present climate. By approving this project it sets the pace to “invest” in these energy sources and ignore alternate energy. By building this infrastructure it will like have a capital life of 25 plus years and encourage more projects like this to take hold.
I’m not sure if you deniers “get it” perhaps listening to Dr. Richard Muller will do it:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/15/-ex-skeptic-richard-muller-congress-global-warming_n_1094966.html

]]>