I wish the Monitor editorial board would take its comment that one party rule can lead to problematic decisions to heart when considering local candidates for the legislature. Because our delegation is from one party only it views it's job as supporting the governor ( democrat for 18 of the last 22 years. ) rather than looking out for the best interests of Concord. A few examples: not one member of our delegation raised one bit of complaint about the siting of the new women's prison in Concord despite the negative fiscal impact it will have on Concord. Not one member of our delegation did anything to oppose the Governor's budget despite the fact it left dozen of beds closed in the psychiatric hospital despite the huge impact that had on citizens who use Concord hospital and on our downtown. Not one member of our delegation complained when the state made hugely uneconomic decisions to renovate the Brown and Walker buildings on the old hospital campus, despite the fact that these projects helped drain our fowntown, had significant traffic impacts and cost taxpayers MORE than if the state leased long term. Not one member of our delegation has been successful in getting the abandoned highway garage eyesore removed on Stickney Avenue. Not a single member of our delegation has done anything to get the state to provide services to former prisoners or psychiatric patients in their former hometowns , instead leaving that burden on Concord.
We have good people serving but because they are always from the same party as the governor they simply go along with that particular Govetnor's agenda rather than looking out for Concord's interests aggressively.
A final note for the editorial board: when the financial recovery money spigot dried up, which added approximately $800 million to the NH budget in one 2 year cycle, can you tell readers of what the Democrat plan was to balance our budget? I am unaware of any plan offered by the Democrats up into the 2010 elections that indicated how they would deal with this. Please also keep in mind that it was the Democratic legislature that bonded current operating debt during the recession– probably the most irresponsible fiscal policy any legislature, controlled by any party, can ever do.
"Contributed to". You can contribute a single buck or a billion. The Cook paper is purposefully designed to be interpreted exactly as you have. But it is misleading. The 97% includes people who would definitely identify themselves as questioners or skeptics of CAGW. ...(full comment)
JD...I am abandoning this discussion. There is no possible fact that will interfere with your opinion, so further discussion is futile. Should you want company in your skepticism (no, wait, it is worse than that, it is negativism) go to Judith Curry's blog Climate, etc. ...(full comment)
There you go again, Itsy...making claims with no rational support. For example: the industrial revolution was from 1790 to 1870 and output of CO2 gases estimated as 54 million tons compared with 8,000 million tons today. This clearly shows how much the rise of manufacturing impacted global CO2 production. To then imply that tornadoes and droughts and hurricanes happened (when 1875/??) and call them severe-when there was no method of measuring severity until 2006, is facetious, comical actually. You really should google CO2 emissions, turns out Gardian reports: "Annual carbon dioxide emissions showed a strong rise of 2.5% on 2013 levels, putting the total emitted this year on track for 40bn tonnes. " Should your estimated CO2 output be anywhere near correct for 1870, at 0.054 billion tons, you can see that now it has grown by 740 times. You might also consider how much coal has been removed from mines, worldwide, to fire power plants and steel plants, let alone the billions of gallons of petroleum burned EACH day. ...(full comment)
Sorry Minnie Pearl, but you have a track record. I have been the object of your fabrications, too. You can also be very snide & sarcastic, then expect full & immediate amnesty. It doesn't work that way, Bette Davis. If you have something else going on behind the scenes with Itsa, then your "cyber stalker" comment doesn't belong here. But since you put it out there, you have to own it. Your main problem is a complete unwillingness to be held accountable for your own tongue. It's not the world, Gladys Kravitz, it's you. ...(full comment)
I think a majority of scientists might agree with CAGW. I think most are too busy to look deeply at the problems with it. Scientists are often too busy to look outside their own work. By the way, though I am not a published scientist, according to Cook's methods, my opinions fit in with the 97%. Ain't that a hoot? ...(full comment)
What your data mining hasn't got to my religion yet, Itsa? I don't know of any place in the New Testament where it mentions that Jesus carried a AR15. But maybe you can correct me on that point. ...(full comment)