Article V

Please, NO HBT, but if you know what Article V of the United States Constitution you may want to check this out:

http://www.ibtimes.com/political-ca...-constitution-theyre-closer-you-think-2552039

I would have to agree that ratifying a Constitutional Convention would be quite the precedent in American History.

With the amount of corporate money flowing into government, you do need to ask yourself:

Is it "We The People", OR "We The Corporations"?

Remember, NO HBT puckey. Intelligent insights and retorts if so inclined please. BTW, Happy Flag Day!

 

Who knows?

But I find this statement from the article both confusing and amusing -

For the country to continue spending at this rate, where revenues are exceeding expenditures consistently, is not sustainable,” Kapenga said

 

Looking at the money puring into the Article V movement, you should ask:
Do we want to formalize the latter?

 

Did you copy that or correct it? I copied and pasted what I saw in the article. Your version would be correct.

 

I see now the article has been edited. You never know if these writers or speakers are putting their foots in mouth. I always take any news item with a grain of salt till the real story shows through.

 

Only one grain of salt??! I usually keep the salt grinder handy when reading the 'news'.

And yeah, I copied it right before posting it. When I read what you put in, I figured it was an editing issue, or they truly have lost it.

 

Too funny, right? Missed the mark a bit there.

I agree about the fiscal matters, but the agencies and laws they want to repeal are necessary in many respects. Environmentally most especially. The Koch brothers have been pouring incredible amounts of capital into politics for many years. The burning of fossil fuels needs to be curtailed. According to geological record (ice core, google it), the Earth has not exceeded 300 ppm CO2 in nearly a million years. Now we're at 400 ppm, with a corollary increase in CH4 in ppb. Methane is more than twenty times the greenhouse gas CO2 is. It is at it's highest level in 800,000 years.

The CO2 levels during the Great Dying 250 million years ago allowed seaweed to choke the ocean at the poles. It was a full on hothouse, and at 90% of the life on this planet went extinct. MIT's research suggests that we're approaching the same level of carbon in the atmosphere which gave us plenty of oil from the Permian, and the time terrestrial and aquatic life came it's closest to being extinguished on the planet. The Siberian traps spewing nickel, a Methanosarcina population explosion, and that's a lot of greenhouse gas. Add some methane clathrate from the sea floor, and the fact methane decays into CO2 anyway, and fry.

All that carbon was buried over time. Life flourished. Then, we burned it, putting it back into play...

 

And yet there is record snowfall in California, so much that some snow ski resorts may be open until August..

The earth has cooled and warmed many times in the past, without man's 'help'. Google ice ages, and warming. It was global cooling in the 1970's, in the 1980's we only had 10 years or so before the world melted. It was global warming, now it is 'man made climate change'. How much CO2 does an active volcano put out?

Affordable fuel alternatives, all for them. More efficient energy with less ecological impact, all for it! Sorry, just not buying the man made climate crisis.

 

Active volcanoes are negligible compared to hundreds of millions of motor vehicles and industry.

Weather is NOT climate.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/images/air_bubbles_historical.jpg

 

Air pollution - which kills 10s of 1000s of people around the world every day - is man made. Of that there is zero doubt.

 

Climate and weather are entirely different.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

https://s18.postimg.org/kkxmx96wp/07805a99ae73d5300c78ff8db167676f.jpg

 

True, weather is a shorter time frame than climate. But if it has not changed on it's own in the past, explain how we had ice ages, warmed, and had ice ages again. Seems to be no evidence linking man with climate change.

Remember when it was global cooling? Then we were told in the 1980's that we only had so many years before the earth was 'doomed'. Many dire predictions of the climate crisis have come and gone, without coming true.

 

From the link I posted previously:
https://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm

https://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm

The ice age fallacy?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-global-cooling-story-came-to-be/
https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm

 

I think your post here is a great example of what I am talking about. Climate 'change/crisis' is a relatively new science. Not too long ago lobotomies were common practice, before then cigarettes were 'healthy'. Heck, using leaches was common practice. Look how far we have come in a relatively short time in the medical field. I think the same will be said about 'man made climate crisis' in the future.

Are we perfect? Heck no. Can we do much more to find renewable energy sources, heck yeah.

 

Climatology has been a formal science for over a century and been studied less formally by others for over 1000 years. There was never scientific consensus on the effectiveness of lobotomies, it was scientific research that demonstrated the dangers of cigarette smoking and there are valid medical uses for leeches. Look it up.

 

The whole idea idea is too funny. Once the ball starts rolling who knows what course it will take or where it will stop. All the diverse ideas mentioned here and many others concerning our basic rights could be made into debate by very few people with way too much power to change our daily life in unpredictable ways. 1, 2, 3, or 38 people should not be given the power to mandate laws which govern over 340 million people!

Another opinion -

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-super-constitutional-convention-20170315-story.html

 

The first constitutional convention was intended to amend and improve the Articles of Confederation. Instead, the delegates tossed it out and replaced them with our current constitution. There are no rules except those concerning titles of nobility and emoluments.

 

Well then Fred, where does the carbon in the atmosphere and oceans come from?

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/lawdome.gif

 

Interesting how that chart is scaled.

Where is the exact science that shows what increased carbon does? And a bit of Googling shows C02 levels were higher when before man was around. Hmm.

 

https://skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm

https://skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past.htm
https://skepticalscience.com/CO2-was-higher-in-late-Ordovician.htm

 

The sun was also not anywhere nearly as energy productive. It takes billions of years of nucleosynthesis for a main sequence star like the sun to "warm up".

CO2 has not exceeded 300 ppm in at least the last 800 milllion years. The ice cores conclusively prove when you add carbon, the planet gets hotter.

Unfortunately, clinging to myths is not science.

 

I hear mistakes like that on TV news more often than would be expected.
People get a little excited and say the exact opposite of what they mean.
Often, they're not corrected by anyone because they understand the intent, or one will sort of suppress a smile and just let it pass.
For me, sometimes, it plants a kind of subliminal double-take confusion that interferes with my focus.
I think it also indicates that people don't always listen very well.