But isn’t it wonderful that the “Fools on the Hill”, Smith Hill that is, have already enjoined the state to participate in the “crusade” to “Save the planet”….
Introduced By: Representatives Handy, Ajello, Segal, Ginaitt, and Gallison
Date Introduced: February 28, 2007
Check it out yourself –
http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE23/23-82/INDEX.HTM
CHAPTER 23-82 – Implementation of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative Act

Scientific data and analyses show that there is no significant human caused global warming.
During the late Ordovician the planet plunged into the Andean/Saharan ice age when the CO2 level was several times the present.
During the last and previous glaciations, atmospheric CO2 increase often lagged temperature increase by hundreds of years
Proxy data from ice cores show temperature trend direction changes. Temperature trend direction changes are not possible if NET feedback from average global temperature is positive.
Average global temperatures for over a century have trended down then up then down then up then down while average annual atmospheric CO2 levels have always risen since 1800. Lack of correlation proves lack of causation.
A simple model accurately predicts average global temperatures since 1895 (i.e. over 114 years…and counting) without any need to consider the effects of change to CO2 level or any other ghg. The model, with an eye-opening graph, is presented in the October 16 pdf at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true. (Replace all references to PDO with ESST which is short for Effective Sea Surface Temperature).
It is woefully naive to think that all that needs to be done to get global weather models (calling them GCMs does not make them GCMs) to predict climate is to run them longer.

Every time I come out of a coal mine I’m hot and dirty.

Monique-
To answer your question about what we should use for fuel, I’d like to nominate squirrels. Those little guys seem to have endless energy. I can solve two problems with on solution. We need fuel/energy and my yard has a ridiculous number of acorns this year. So I’m happy to feed all the acorns to the squirrels and we’ll harness their energy on a wheel (turbine) and get all that free power.
That’s my answer. Squirrels.

“This leads inevitably to the question: if global warming isn’t all that warm, maybe it isn’t anthropogenic, either.” There you have it folks. Some might call that know-nothing rejectionism of the science itself (but what do those eggheads know). So what does the study itself conclude? The paper describes three scenarios: If Earth’s climate sensitivity is at the low end of current estimates as given by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, then the total maximum future emissions of heat-trapping gases so as not to exceed the 3.6° threshold would correspond to about 35 years of present annual emissions of CO2 from fossil-fuel combustion. A climate sensitivity at the present best estimate would mean that no more heat-trapping gases can be added to the atmosphere without committing the planet to exceeding the threshold. And if the sensitivity is at the high end of current estimates, present atmospheric concentrations of heat-trapping gases are such that the planet is already committed to warming that substantially exceeds the 3.6° threshold. So we might have as long as 35 years to correct course, or we may already have passed the point of no return. As for the author, is he concerned? “I’m very concerned about the world my grandchildren will live in,” said Mr. Schwartz, who is currently studying climate change. “There could be an increase of four to eight degrees in the next century, and that’s huge. The last time there was a five-degree Celsius decrease was the last ice age. An increase of eight degrees Fahrenheit would bring change unprecedented in the last half-million years.” It’s interesting how little tolerance some on the extreme right have for ambiguity. Black/white, with us/against us, right/wrong. That’s not how science works, as much as those outside of the profession wish it were so, and only… Read more »

Russ clearly has no sense of irony. The global-warmingists are the ones who have put religious faith in “scientific” claims that have now been proven to be based on fraudulent manipulation of data.
Where did your skepticism go, Russ?

Russ, thanks for the answer. Based on it, I am convinced that you are not a scientist.
I have a friend who is a cardiologist. He told me they have a saying: “Prescription before diagnosis is malpractice.”
I accuse you and the other fear-mongers of malpractice.

Bob, the sooner the better. I can’t wait to put these little guys to work and at the same time to clean up all the acorns in my yard. Plus, I can put even more people to work to build the little wire frame squirrel wheels. And to further help current problems, I’ll adopt all the cats at the animal shelters and any other terrier-type dogs and have them stand just outside the squirrel wheel, to keep the squirrels moving. We can’t have them standing around drinking water. Next thing you know, they’ll all want to unionize or something. Gotta squash that before it even starts.

“Prescription before diagnosis is malpractice.”
Umm, I’ve made no prescription here whatsoever. I even pointed out that I am skeptical in what’s being suggested as remedies. What I have said is that the scientific evidence on the “diagnosis” side is near incontrovertible (that AGW is occurring and presents a credible threat), an opinion I share with nearly everyone in scientific community.
Whether you think my engineering degree qualifies me as a scientist, makes no difference to me one way or the other. I never said it did; I just answered Joe’s question, since he seemed to think it relevant.

“I still have a near religious faith in science and in the overwhelming evidence that we are on the edge of a dangerous precipice, quite possibly already too late to avoid disaster. When I get skeptical is when I view any specific plan of action to address the problem, a problem that only the most uninformed and reactionary folks could possibly still be debating.”
Russ, my point is that you have assumed the diagnosis of the alarmists is correct and cling to it with religious-like faith – despite the recently revealed “overwhelming evidence” that the “evidence” in which you believe is fraudulent.

Very concerned? Hardly. Yes, it was picked up in the media, but you’re not seriously suggesting that the idea was paid the same attention in the scientific community?

A survey of the scientific literature has found that between 1965 and 1979, 44 scientific papers predicted warming, 20 were neutral and just 7 predicted cooling. So while predictions of cooling got more media attention, the majority of scientists were predicting warming even then.

The “skinhead”and “militia”hysteria magnified the influence of marginal groups and individuals for the express purpose of instituting oppressive gun control-this is the dream of Obama,Holder and turds like Sheldon as part of a grand scheme of control of our daily existence.Of course THEY all have armed retinues around them.
Hypocrites all.

UMMM?Right,Russ-this “death plot”was hatched by a couple of dysfunctional nitwits who got nowhere near being dangerous to Obama or anyone else.
You are real good at the Jack McConnell/Matt Jerzyk/Pat Crowley method of taking isolated instances to build a false edifice of mass danger.It won’t sell here,pal.
Real highly organized criminal groups like MS13(mostly illegal aliens)are of no concern to you “progressives”are they?They’re just poor oppressed minority youth,right?What’s a few rapes or murders in the grand political scheme of the “progressives”?
The best example of this panicked exaggeration was the incident where a hardware store owner was rude to a couple of Hispanic customers-it was turned into a three ring circus by the ethnic pimps and their RIFbot allies.It didn’t amount to crap.
You people do everything with an underlying purpose and no amount of shading the truth or outright fabrication is off the table.”You people”=”progressives”.
Are there some dangerous white supremacists or militia types?Yes.But they don’t amount a mouhful of spit in the ocean compared to organized criminal groups,both American and foreign,operating within the US.
The militia/supremacists have little chance of any mass following and usually are enagged in mutually destructive rivalries which hamper their “effectiveness”,if you want to think of it that way.
I realize that thugs like the “New Black Panther Party”(unconnected to the Black Panthers of my era)are of no concern to you because like a fool you somehow think they have no bad intentions towards you-after all,you’re on their side,right?If I were you,I wouldn’t count on them believing any such thing.