Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (837610)	2/19/2015 11:42:57 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576180

"The switch from the label “global warming” to “climate change” many years ago was a public relations disaster," Memo exposes Bush's new green strategy Oliver Burkeman in Washington Monday 3 March 2003 20.48 EST Last modified on Wednesday 1 October 2014 04.18 EDT The US Republican party is changing tactics on the environment, avoiding "frightening" phrases such as global warming, after a confidential party memo warned that it is the domestic issue on which George Bush is most vulnerable. The memo, by the leading Republican consultant Frank Luntz, concedes the party has "lost the environmental communications battle" and urges its politicians to encourage the public in the view that there is no scientific consensus on the dangers of greenhouse gases. "The scientific debate is closing [against us] but not yet closed. There is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science," Mr Luntz writes in the memo, obtained by the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based campaigning organisation. "Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. "Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate." The phrase "global warming" should be abandoned in favour of "climate change", Mr Luntz says, and the party should describe its policies as "conservationist" instead of "environmentalist", because "most people" think environmentalists are "extremists" who indulge in "some pretty bizarre behaviour... that turns off many voters". Words such as "common sense" should be used, with pro-business arguments avoided wherever possible. The environment, the memo says, "is probably the single issue on which Republicans in general - and President Bush in particular - are most vulnerable". A Republican source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said party strategists agreed with Mr Luntz's conclusion that "many Americans believe Republicans do not care about the environment". The popular image is that they are "in the pockets of corporate fat cats who rub their hands together and chuckle manically [sic] as they plot to pollute America for fun and profit", Mr Luntz adds. The phrase "global warming" appeared frequently in President Bush's speeches in 2001, but decreased to almost nothing during 2002, when the memo was produced. Environmentalists have accused the party and oil companies of helping to promulgate the view that serious doubt remains about the effects of global warming. Last week, a panel of experts appointed at the Bush administration's request to analyse the president's climate change strategy found that it lacked "vision, executable goals, clear timetables and criteria for measuring progress". "Rather than focusing on the things we don't know, it's almost as if parts of the plan were written by people who are totally unfamiliar with where ecosystems science is coming from," panel member William Schlesinger told the Guardian. Mr Luntz urges Republicans to "emphasise the importance of 'acting only with all the facts in hand'", in line with the White House position that mandatory restrictions on emissions, as required by the Kyoto protocol, should not be countenanced until further research is undertaken. The memo singles out as a major strategic failure the incoming Bush administration's response to Bill Clinton's last-minute executive order reducing the permitted level of arsenic in drinking water from 50 parts per billion to 10 parts per billion. The new administration put the plan on hold, prompting "the biggest public relations misfire of President Bush's first year in office", Mr Luntz writes. The perception was that Mr Bush "was actively putting in more arsenic in the water". "A compelling story, even if factually inaccurate, can be more emotionally compelling than a dry recitation of the truth," Mr Luntz notes in the memo. theguardian.com

To: Brumar89 who wrote (837610)	2/19/2015 11:51:41 AM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576180

1934 – An Extremely Extreme Year Posted on February 19, 2015 by stevengoddard The year 1934 was far more extreme than anything we have experienced recently. Maximum temperatures averaged the hottest in US history Like the current February, temperatures in the east were extremely cold Almost 70% of the US reached 100 degrees, compared to just over 20% last year. 80% of the US was in drought. The drought in the US during 1934 blew away all records, but it wasn’t just in the US – it was all over the world. TimesMachine: June 6, 1934 – NYTimes.com TimesMachine: May 29, 1934 – NYTimes.com LONDON, June 2, 1934 WORLD DROUGHT Farmers’ Ruinous Losses Almost Universal Disaster Europe Revives Pagan Rites A survey of the threat of a world drought reveals ruinous losses by farmers in many parts of the world. There is an actual shortage of food, with young crops blasted in the ground by the scorching sunshine and thousands of cattle without pasture. The disaster is felt from the Mississippi in the United States, to the Volga, in Russia, from the Yugoslavian valleys to the Western Canadian prairies. 04 Jun 1934 – WORLD DROUGHT Farmers’ Ruinous Losses Almost Uni… http://trove.nla.gov.au/ http://news.google.com/newspapers http://trove.nla.gov.au/ http://trove.nla.gov.au/ Almost the entire US was over 100 degrees during June, 1934 http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/062/mwr-062-06-0212.pdf 02 Feb 1935 – DISASTERS OF 1934 REVIEWEL Millions Were Rendere… If we had a year like 1934 now, climate experts would boldly declare 99.7% certainty that such weather was impossible below 350 PPM CO2. https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/1934-an-extremely-extreme-year/ LeeHarvey says: February 19, 2015 at 1:41 pm Re: Almost the entire US was over 100 degrees during June, 1934 Every state did hit 100 degrees. All 48 of them.