Montana: proposed bill plans to repeal physics

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 5:47 AM GMT
    http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2011/billhtml/HB0549.htm
    [url]http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/02/17/montana-legislator-seeks-to-repeal-physics-unless-it-benefits-the-state/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+DiscoverIntersection+%28The+Intersection%29[/url]Section 1. Public policy concerning global warming. (1) The legislature finds that to ensure economic development in Montana and the appropriate management of Montana’s natural resources it is necessary to adopt a public policy regarding global warming.
    (2) The legislature finds:
    (a) global warming is beneficial to the welfare and business climate of Montana;
    (b) reasonable amounts of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere have no verifiable impacts on the environment; and
    (c) global warming is a natural occurrence and human activity has not accelerated it.
    (3) (a) For the purposes of this section, “global warming” relates to an increase in the average temperature of the earth’s surface.
    (b) It does not include a one-time, catastrophic release of carbon dioxide.


    comment by the bloggerSo, as far as I’m concerned, this law would essentially repeal physics, because there is simply no doubt that carbon dioxide molecules in the atmosphere have an impact, and this is due to their basic radiative properties. Gleick agrees.

    But drill down a bit, and the legislation becomes kind of interesting. Despite its incoherence, Read’s bill does suggest at points an awareness that carbon dioxide can be involved in climate change–but then offers this weird idea that “reasonable” amounts of carbon dioxide don’t matter, it’s only “a one time, catastrophic release” that matters.

    Maybe it depends on what you mean by a “one time, catastrophic release.” From the perspective of the planet, the last 200 years are just the tiniest flicker in time. And there has been a catastrophic release.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 6:39 PM GMT
    I've promised myself to stop commenting on anything that has to do with American politics.

    All I can say is oh oh America...

    It really is an idiocracy. Very sad.

    P.S. the fact that 200 years on a geological scale is less than a split second is probably wasted on people who think the world was created 6000 years ago.

    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 6:49 PM GMT
    Against my better judgment I read that blog article and I've exceeded the daily amount of fail I can handle without getting a headache. Now I'll have to go to work today ready to backhand someone at a moments notice.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 6:50 PM GMT
    No offence to Montana people but where the fuck is MOntana?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 6:52 PM GMT
    Well, I live in more of a left-wing totalitarian state, (and a special federal regulatory zone) where federal and state bureaucrats revoke the laws of physics quite often. Sometimes it's hard to tell if they're really that stupid or just really evil. More often both, I suppose. They don't have to introduce any kind of bill - just issue a decree.

    The inverse square law is specifically revoked. Water is required to flow up-hill. Air pollution legally flows up-wind and concentrates itself. Turtles are mammals. Light is required to behave in strange non-newtonian ways. The list is really endless.

    I really think that we should do away with the budgets for these organizations entirely. They ought to be able to support themselves from all of the Nobel Prize money they must be eligible for. Not to mention all of the patents that should follow from these discoveries.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 6:54 PM GMT
    Of course, global warming will help Montana. They in the frozen north. And how does one define reasonable? This is just a bunch of politics in state that doesn't have enough peopleto make a good size city!
  • Syphon

    Posts: 366

    Feb 22, 2011 7:04 PM GMT
    But global warming is a natural occurance...

    Pretty sure there weren't any cars and factories pumping out CO2 when the last ice age ended.

    That's still hilarious though.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 7:11 PM GMT
    Sadly, I think we are feeling the effects of Al Gore. With his activisim, the Right easily turned this scientific issue into a political issue.

    I think he has done more harm than good.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 7:15 PM GMT
    Again... it's funny...

    Compared to other first world countries, we have one of the largest percentages of people who reject evolution and climate change (let alone anthropogenic climate change).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 7:19 PM GMT
    Wow that's all I have to say, someone who lives in New York asking where Montana is, it is one of the 50 states, and you call yourself educated.

    This bill has not even been voted on so before you pass judgments on an entire state wait to see what the house ACTUALLY does. You do not know the Montana system and how it deals with bills so do not try to talk about it.

    As a graduate of the University of MONTANA, there is a huge push for sustainability on campus and promoting this within the students. Science general education courses are actually one of the highest required gen eds amongst the students in order to graduate.

    Here's a little information about the University of Montana that I hope will open your eyes to the fact that there are educated people within the state, "The University of Montana ranks 17th in the nation and fifth among public universities in producing Rhodes Scholars, with a total of 28 such scholars."

    Just because the state of Montana has a couple of idiots like Joe Read doesn't mean the rest of the state even agrees with him. Every state has these including California, New York, and so on. Yes the state has less than a million people but that doesn't give you the right to discredit every single person there.

    I might live in Chicago now but do not insult Montana, my friends who are still there, and the other people in the state. You can only insult the idiot who INTRODUCED the bill and the ones who vote yes on it, if it gets that far.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2011 7:27 PM GMT
    Remember, this is the same Montana where the State Republican Party once again included in their official platform, during their June, 2010, convention, that the mere act of being gay should be made illegal.

    http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/09/18/us_gays_in_montana

    Now I know some of their defenders here say we shouldn't take it serious, it's likely not going to happen. Then why should the Republicans waste their time with it, if not what they really want? If they want equal civil rights for gays, why not put THAT in their party platform, as the Democrats do?

    US politics are spinning out of control. And guys right here on RJ are cheering on the wing-nuts and gay haters. And trying to get the rest of us to support them. Odd the guys who argue the most for right-wing politics here are the guys who contribute the least on other subjects, in a gay health & fitness site. icon_question.gif
  • DCEric

    Posts: 3713

    Feb 22, 2011 7:29 PM GMT
    Meteorologist Eric: In all seriousness, global warming will generate a bunch of winners, along with the much more more numerous losers. Longer growing seasons in higher altitudes will benefit crop production in those countries and regions, among other benefits.

    The Rest of Eric: Seriously, WTF?