Skip to main content

Home/ Politically Minded/ Group items tagged coal

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Joe La Fleur

Borelli: President Obama Keeps Promise to Bankrupt Coal Industry | TheBlaze.com - 0 views

www.theblaze.com/...mise-to-bankrupt-coal-industry

president obama keeps promise coal industry

shared by Joe La Fleur on 22 Apr 12 - No Cached
  • Joe La Fleur on 22 Apr 12
     
    COAL, RAILROAD, TRUCKING & ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING JOBS LOST. THE ECONOMYS OF WEST VIRGINIA, PENNSYLVANIA, ILLINOIS, INDIANA AND OHIO CRUSHED. 50% OF ELECTRICTY COMES FROM COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS. THESE ARE THE PLANTS THAT GENERATE ELECTRICYT TO CHARGE ELECTRIC CARS.
Joe La Fleur

Obama's War On Coal Outrages Pennsylvanians | EPA Abuse - 0 views

epaabuse.com/...n-coal-outrages-pennsylvanians

obama war coal epa abuse

shared by Joe La Fleur on 20 Apr 12 - No Cached
  • Joe La Fleur on 20 Apr 12
     
    Hurting Pennsylvanias economy and killing thousands of jobs.
Joe La Fleur

Greenpeace Goes After Apple Over 'Dirty Coal' | EPA Abuse - 0 views

epaabuse.com/...es-after-apple-over-dirty-coal

greenpeace goes apple coal epa abuse

shared by Joe La Fleur on 19 Apr 12 - No Cached
  • Joe La Fleur on 19 Apr 12
     
    Their figures do not include the co2 that people and other anamals breath out..IE: They are lieing, a progressives favorite pass time. Don't these guys have jobs? Actually they are living off of government grants....ain't that a hoot?
Joe La Fleur

EPA to kill new coal-fired plants through first-ever greenhouse-gas regulatio... - 0 views

hotair.com/...ver-greenhouse-gas-regulations

epa plants regulations energy coal politics news abuse

shared by Joe La Fleur on 27 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • Joe La Fleur on 27 Mar 12
     
    OBAMAS WAR ON ENERGY, DRIVING UP COSTS ON PURPOSE
Joe La Fleur

The Obama admin is trying to keep the "war on coal" covert, but it's definite... - 0 views

hotair.com/...but-its-definitely-still-there

obama admin keep war coal covert

shared by Joe La Fleur on 13 Sep 12 - No Cached
  • Joe La Fleur on 13 Sep 12
     
    OBAMAS WAR ON FISSIL FUELS, JOBS AND AMERICAN FAMILIES
thinkahol *

Roll up, roll up! The laws of the United States are now officially for sale! : Johann Hari - 0 views

johannhari.com/...es-are-now-officially-for-sale

up roll up! laws of the United States are now officially for sale! : Johann Hari

shared by thinkahol * on 07 Nov 10 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 07 Nov 10
     
    The laws and policies of the legislature of the United States of America are now effectively on eBay, for sale to the highest bidder. Are you a Wall Street boss who wants to party like it's 2007? Are you a Big Coal baron who wants to burn, baby, burn? Are you an insurance company that wants to be able to kick sick people off your rolls? Meet John Boehner, the most powerful Republican and soon-to-be Speaker of the House. But -- of course! -- you already have. Here's an example of how you have worked together. In 1995, the House was going to finally repeal subsidies for growing tobacco, because an addictive cancer-causing drug didn't seem like the most deserving recipient of taxpayers' cash -- until Boehner walked the floor of the House handing out checks from tobacco lobbyists to his fellow elected representatives. They changed their minds. The subsidy stayed. Explaining his check-dispensing, Boehner says: "It's gone on here for a long time." So get your bids in: The House is open for business.
Skeptical Debunker

Belief In Climate Change Hinges On Worldview : NPR - 0 views

www.npr.org/...story.php

social science individuals communitarians climate change disagreement

shared by Skeptical Debunker on 25 Feb 10 - Cached
  • "People tend to conform their factual beliefs to ones that are consistent with their cultural outlook, their world view," Braman says. The Cultural Cognition Project has conducted several experiments to back that up. Participants in these experiments are asked to describe their cultural beliefs. Some embrace new technology, authority and free enterprise. They are labeled the "individualistic" group. Others are suspicious of authority or of commerce and industry. Braman calls them "communitarians." In one experiment, Braman queried these subjects about something unfamiliar to them: nanotechnology — new research into tiny, molecule-sized objects that could lead to novel products. "These two groups start to polarize as soon as you start to describe some of the potential benefits and harms," Braman says. The individualists tended to like nanotechnology. The communitarians generally viewed it as dangerous. Both groups made their decisions based on the same information. "It doesn't matter whether you show them negative or positive information, they reject the information that is contrary to what they would like to believe, and they glom onto the positive information," Braman says.
  • "Basically the reason that people react in a close-minded way to information is that the implications of it threaten their values," says Dan Kahan, a law professor at Yale University and a member of The Cultural Cognition Project. Kahan says people test new information against their preexisting view of how the world should work. "If the implication, the outcome, can affirm your values, you think about it in a much more open-minded way," he says. And if the information doesn't, you tend to reject it. In another experiment, people read a United Nations study about the dangers of global warming. Then the researchers told the participants that the solution to global warming is to regulate industrial pollution. Many in the individualistic group then rejected the climate science. But when more nuclear power was offered as the solution, says Braman, "they said, you know, it turns out global warming is a serious problem."And for the communitarians, climate danger seemed less serious if the only solution was more nuclear power.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Then there's the "messenger" effect. In an experiment dealing with the dangers versus benefits of a vaccine, the scientific information came from several people. They ranged from a rumpled and bearded expert to a crisply business-like one. The participants tended to believe the message that came from the person they considered to be more like them. In relation to the climate change debate, this suggests that some people may not listen to those whom they view as hard-core environmentalists. "If you have people who are skeptical of the data on climate change," Braman says, "you can bet that Al Gore is not going to convince them at this point." So, should climate scientists hire, say, Newt Gingrich as their spokesman? Kahan says no. "The goal can't be to create a kind of psychological house of mirrors so that people end up seeing exactly what you want," he argues. "The goal has to be to create an environment that allows them to be open-minded."And Kahan says you can't do that just by publishing more scientific data.
  • Skeptical Debunker on 25 Feb 10
     
    "It's a hoax," said coal company CEO Don Blankenship, "because clearly anyone that says that they know what the temperature of the Earth is going to be in 2020 or 2030 needs to be put in an asylum because they don't." On the other side of the debate was environmentalist Robert Kennedy, Jr. "Ninety-eight percent of the research climatologists in the world say that global warming is real, that its impacts are going to be catastrophic," he argued. "There are 2 percent who disagree with that. I have a choice of believing the 98 percent or the 2 percent." To social scientist and lawyer Don Braman, it's not surprising that two people can disagree so strongly over science. Braman is on the faculty at George Washington University and part of The Cultural Cognition Project, a group of scholars who study how cultural values shape public perceptions and policy
thinkahol *

Dr. Daniel G. Nocera - YouTube - 0 views

www.youtube.com/watch

Personalized Energy for 1 (x 6 Billion): A Solution to the Global Challenge Dr. Daniel G. Nocera - YouTube

shared by thinkahol * on 12 Aug 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 12 Aug 11
     
    The supply of secure, clean, sustainable energy is arguably the most important scientific and technical challenge facing humanity in the 21st century. Rising living standards of a growing world population will cause global energy consumption to double by mid-century and triple by the end of the century. Even in light of unprecedented conservation, the additional energy needed is simply not attainable from long discussed sources these include nuclear, biomass, wind, geothermal and hydroelectric. The global appetite for energy is simply too much. Petroleum-based fuel sources (i.e., coal, oil and gas) could be increased. However, deleterious consequences resulting from external drivers of economy, the environment, and global security dictate that this energy need be met by renewable and sustainable sources. The dramatic increase in global energy need is driven by 3 billion low-energy users in the non-legacy world and by 3 billion people yet to inhabit the planet over the next half century. The capture and storage of solar energy at the individual level personalized solar energy drives inextricably towards the heart of this energy challenge by addressing the triumvirate of secure, carbon neutral and plentiful energy. This talk will place the scale of the global energy issue in perspective and then discuss how personalized energy (especially for the non-legacy world) can provide a path to a solution to the global energy challenge. Daniel G. Nocera is the Henry Dreyfus Professor of Energy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Director of the Solar Revolutions Project and Director of the Eni Solar Frontiers Center at MIT. His group pioneered studies of the basic mechanisms of energy conversion in biology and chemistry. He has recently accomplished a solar fuels process that captures many of the elements of photosynthesis outside of the leaf. This discovery sets the stage for a storage mechanism for the large scale, distributed, deployment of solar energy. He has b
Bakari Chavanu

Skepticblog » Capitalism-A Propaganda Story - 0 views

skepticblog.org/...capitalism-a-propaganda-story

comment politics micheal moore micheal shermer

shared by Bakari Chavanu on 16 Oct 09 - Cached
  • When Michael Moore said that capitalism should be replaced by democracy, it didn’t make the most sense, I agree. However, it is well known that the economic system of socialism change how effective a political system works. Captialism, when allowed to go to extremes can also interfere with our political system.
  • Suggestion #1 Shermer should stay out of politics and economics. #2 He and all of you should read this: How the Servant Became a Predator, Finance’s Five Fatal Flaws By William K. Black Assoc. Professor, Univ. of Missouri, Kansas City
  • Michael Moore is a fantastic skeptic. He doesn’t fall for the cultural mythologies of our age. The fervor that some people hold for their favorite economic systems is much akin to that held for religions. People get bent all out of shape when someone is sacrilegious enough to point out the problems and disconnects within their worshipped system. Some people think that there is some kind of magical something or other to their economic system that makes it function automatically. When you go looking for the “man behind the curtain”, you find out how frail the system really is.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • The microeconomics that drive the lives of ordinary people and businessmen do not necessarily coordinate with the macroeconomic needs of a nation.
  • In this latest installment in his continuing series of what’s wrong with America, Michael Moore takes aim at his biggest target to date, and the result is a disaster. The documentary is not nearly as funny as his previous films, the music selections seem contrived and flat, and the edits and transitions are clumsy, wooden, and not nearly as effective as what we’ve come to expect from the premiere documentarian (Ken Burns notwithstanding) of our time. And, most importantly, the film’s central thesis is so bad that it’s not even wrong.
  • Even if people were more educated individual behavior is determined by the structure of society.
  • I fail to see how businesses only operate without coercion. Businesses only operate without coercion if they have been coerced to do so. There are many examples in history of businesses taking as much control of their employees’ lives as possible. It is only due to government regulation that we do not have more businesses treating employess as property as some coal mines once did.
  • If we ask which economic system produces the greatest human well-being, the overwhelming evidence is already in: we know economic libertarianism doesn’t work. The only serious question, the only question for critical thinkers, is what balance between state and market (assuming we can even make a meaningful distinction between them in some cases) is ideal?
  • Both are idealistic, purist and pseudo-rational systems of belief that were the basis of the greatest ideological divide of the 20th century. I think it’s time we grew up from both and set about the hard task of finding out how to really make an economic system work for us, and not the other way around.
  • In general, libertarians seem to have a blindspot when it comes to noticing the self-serving aspects of their beliefs. They often spout words like “liberty” and “freedom” without even considering that they might be truly wanting “liberty” from responsibility toward others and “freedom” from paying back the society that has often served their interests quite well.
1 - 15 of 15
Showing 20▼ items per page