Page 1 of 97
Posted on October 23 at 8:04 p.m.
nativegeo: I think GEO is approaching a recommendation to close Santa Barbara Airport and ban human use of the ocean for the obvious reasons that aircraft have crashed in the past, ships have sunk, people have drowned, been eaten by sharks, etc. Possibly GEO has broken CFL's in the past and was unaware of the high vapor pressure of the Hg they contain, but maybe he was a mad hatter before they were invented.
GEO - Fukushima was caused by a gun-type nuclear weapon, sabotage by an Israeli company, Magna BP. Photos of the device, aerial photos of the town showing no damage before it was hit by the tsunami caused by the explosion, USGS graphs inconsistent with a 9.0 earthquake:http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/fuku...
On Measure P Deserves Your Support
Posted on October 23 at 7:26 p.m.
GEO - You can thank IPCC 'chief scientist' Rajendra Pachauri; economist, railroad engineer, Rothschild investment banker, and owner of the fracking patent based on injection of CO2, previously used in Texas by his company, Glorioil, although it didn't work.
On Measure P: Can We See the Future Without It?
Posted on October 23 at 7:14 p.m.
"Kevin Drude, deputy director of the county’s Energy Division, estimates that approximately half of the county’s approximately 1,200 wells use steam injection, and he added that the measure, if passed, would eventually affect all currently active wells."
Katie Davis is on KCSB right now, lying about Measure P: no impact on existing drilling, no impact on jobs - it's "a ban on fracking", and No on P is trying to confuse voters.
She's really a disgusting scam artist:
But the county supervisors who bothered to try to cta's on Measure P liability have no problem with county voters' inundation with disinformation. It seems likely that a county government that allows voters to be grossly mislead on issues like this has already thrown in the towel in future litigation.It's great that they've brought in the strawman of appeal to authority, though - actors and songwriters can definitely supply the expert opinions on oil exploration technology and geology to support their emotional decision-making, along with former UCSB professors who support a political fiction rather than science.
On Measure P: Are You Kidding?
Posted on October 23 at 6:23 p.m.
spacey - how can you guess what would happen if you mentioned a fact?
Posted on October 23 at 2:20 p.m.
deleted from Noozhawk 2:05 10/23
I have no idea why Measure P supporters continually ignore the fact that the economic impact report prepared at the request of county supervisors says that Measure P will shut down all current oil drilling within around 5 years.
The association of Measure P with fracking gives it the support of a well-funded international anti-fracking campaign and also associates county oil drilling with environmental hazards that are unrelated to SB county oil exploration or to the passage of Measure P.
OPEC has increased supply to bring prices down in an attempt to make US shale oil production unprofitable, but mideast producers have also attacked US shale oil producers by funding the nationwide anti-fracking campaign.
Matt Damon's anti-fracking film "The Promised Land", with a $15 million budget, was funded mainly by Media Abu Dabai, a UAE state-owned corporation.
James O'Keefe's Project Veritas videotaped three well-known Hollywood players taking money, supposedly $9 million, from an OPEC oil dynasty official to bankroll an anti-fracking movie. The OPEC representative is saying something to the effect of "My client's interest is to end American energy independence, your interest is to end fracking, you understand that?"
Fracking can help to slow global warming admit UN scientists... and so can nuclear powerBlow to green activists who are concerned about the effects of frackingBen Spencer April 13, 2014http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetec...
Posted on October 22 at 1:39 p.m.
I'm glad that GEO made the point that Yes on Measure P is not a grassroots organization lobbying on a local ballot measure that bans new oil development using methods currently used in the county, and that it's part of a large, national (GEO mentions the Missouri River) anti-fracking campaign that's unrelated to Santa Barbara's Measure P, since the county has no current fracking or plans for fracking, and SB County Supervisors have acted to stop fracking in the 2 instances it occurred in the county. This is a very well-funded national campaign, financed by private non-profit donations, government funding, and multi-million-dollar environmental non-profit groups. Measure P's funding isn't grass-roots; if it was, FRACKING wouldn't be continually mentioned by Measure P supporters. The Measure P campaign policy is to confuse Santa Barbara's ballot measure with an irrelevant national anti-fracking campaign and biasing voters against Measure P by associating it with negative impacts of fracking that aren't an issue in the county.
"Measure P will shut down nearly all oil and gas production and cost our county millions of tax dollars. This claim is simply not true. As County Supervisor Salud Carbajal has stated, “Measure P would allow existing oil operations and all new conventional oil production to continue while mitigating the air-quality impacts and public health risks associated with new high-intensity oil development.” County Supervisor Salud Carbajal has obviously not read the economic impact report commissioned by county supervisors, which includes this fact.
I guess John Kelly didn't notice the implied contradiction between his claims that 1) No on P has deep pockets and Yes on P doesn't and 2) If oil companies (the ones with deep pockets) sue, we can afford a defense.
Posted on October 22 at 1:02 p.m.
Error in my last comment - you can't plot the data; it's in tabular form with numerical rankings for hottest month and year, etc. You can export the data to excel and plot it.
On <em>The Independent</em> Got It Wrong
Posted on October 22 at 12:38 p.m.
Dennis Allen - This is a fun NOAA website. You can plot average temperature, minimum temperature, maximum temperature, precipitation, # of hotter than average days and cooler than average days, Palmer Drought Index and Palmer Hydrological Drought index by month and # rank from 1900 - 2014, based on NOAA historical data, and it's very easy to use.
Then you can compare the record hottest and coolest and driest months and years by numbered rank with current NOAA and NASA and GISS (only recent data) and see that the records for hottest and driest and coldest years, etc, have been altered in the current data released to the public and quoted by Obama and AGW-alarmists and used as the basis for climate legislation,and you can see that your statements that
'Climate change is happening' and'as it intensifies (it) will create ever greater risk for our future on this planet' and
'Climate scientists are clear that we have only a small window of time to radically alter our course'
aren't based on climate data, but on scientific fraud and politics.
and that there's no climate science to support the statement that
'part of what is required is to leave 80 percent of known fossil fuel reserves in the ground'
And there's increasing evidence that oil is not fossil fuel; that it's abiotic and continually produced in the earth's core, since it's found at much greater depths below the surface than fossilized organic material.
Posted on October 22 at 12:09 p.m.
More bs there, DB: The Measure P oil production issue is that US oil production is reducing dependence on foreign oil - that's the topic of your comment. 'producing more oil than it imports' was your comment on a ballot measure that will reduce US oil productionin the context of the bigger issue of reducing US dependence on foreign oil.The choices you've given yourself are: 1) your first comment was obfuscation designed to be misinterpreted as reducing US dependence on foreign oil
2) your first comment was irrelevant to a discussion of Measure P, showing an inability to track the topic
Posted on October 22 at 10:19 a.m.
Try reading your comment DrDan - "I indicated we are an importer". Where did you indicate that? "Nov. '13 the USA began producing more domestic oil than it imports, and we're nearing the point where WE are the world's greatest producer of oil; no shortage there so your pathetic Middle Eastern argument fails. This webref shows us that in 2015 we will produce more domestic oil than any year since 1972"