Comments on: Ex-Aide: Cheney Nixed CDC Report Testimony

Findings On Climate Change's Health Effects Dropped At VP Office's Urging, Former EPA Official Says

[komoncents]

I think a pretty strong case for criminal mischief of endangering the public at large in utter violation of protecting the citizens of the US could easily be made in this case.

Of course the trial for this one would have to take a back seat to the impeachment for war crimes and genocide trials for crimes against humanity.

Or maybe the 962 lies they told us leading us to a war that''s cost a million lives, many innocent women and children, and faciltated the largest transfer of wealth the world has ever seen, will be excused as an "oops."

I think every single senator and congressman that''s not jumping up and down on their desks screaming for impeachment should be voted out of office as bought and paid for enablers.

Vote em all out.

[bobnjersey]

[I also read about the prediction all the ice will melt off the North Pole this year. My question is why isnt Florida under water?]

florida sits on top of a natural flotation device ... it''s mentioned in the bible.

[bobnjersey]

[Somebody please help me out here...is it just me or is the majority of people who wont listen to the warnings of global warming are mostly religous folk...I dont understand these people....they praise the Lord for what he has created but they dont give a damm about preserving it..]
[Posted by jocro12 at 05:09 PM : Jul 08, 2008]

the same ''scientists'' that make the claims about global warming are also from the group that says the earth is older than 10k years ... and they can''t be accepting of that.

rational thought and logical reasoning are not required ... even frowned upon.

[impeach__w]

We already knew these were liars and crooks when they were "elected" - I often throw around the terms corrupt and war criminal-but I won''t here.

It''s not like we need more evidence. We didn''t even need more proof!

It isn''t pollution that''s harming the environment. It''s the impurities in our air and water that are doing it.''
--Al Gore, as Vice President

''We''ve got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need ?''
--Lee Iacocca

[martel_v]

Don''''t worry. These same corporations will supply you with the oxygen tanks and boats you will need in the coming disaster. - Posted by UnderMyBoot

So Ronnie Ray-gun''s fantasy will finally become real. ''Trickle-down'' will cause the rising tide to lift all boats!

Assuming, of course, that we will all have boats.

Otherwise, we drown; but we''re doing that anyway when his fantasy is applied to economics, so I guess it will pretty much be a case of "the more things change, the more they stay the same". Ain''t greed wonderful? No, wait, I mean ain''t greed wonderful when you have a yacht!

[inventagod2]

The crooks in Washington will not be investigated by the crooks in the newspaper trade.

[donevis-2009]

OneOpinion, obviously.. Its the weight of the water.. It has to do with displacement. It will seek the same level as a glass with ice. Observe that there is exposed ice above the liquid in the glass. Same physics apply.

[undermyboot]

Truth and integrity loose out again. Pro-corporate Republican policy wins.

Don''t worry. These same corporations will supply you with the oxygen tanks and boats you will need in the coming disaster.

[incog-nito]

Vice-president Cheney reportedly pushed for the deletions to the report based on his own climatology studies, which he conducted as a hobby in his spare time.

[lemonskink]

Again, more lies from the Bush Regime. There is more than enough to impeach the whole gang, and it should be done regardless of how long they have left in office. They have killed thousands of people in the Iraq lie, including a young medic who overdosed the other day because he couldn''t live with himself.

[oneopinion]

I think someone needs to set a glass of ice water on the table and let the ice melt. The level will go down and its not all from evaporation. You are making some incredible statements that aren''''t backed up by observable science.

Posted by blh643 at 04:46 PM : Jul 08, 2008

Uh ... you''re talking about ice IN water melting vs ice ABOVE the water melting INTO the water. Yes, very observable ... and catastrophic.

[martel_v]

Democracy is fundimetally flawed. The votes of people who do not understand the most basic concepts of physics count the same as mine! - Posted by gwagener

Now there''s a basic truth! On the other hand, the alternatives don''t work either.

[jntlw-2009]

I think someone needs to set a glass of ice water on the table and let the ice melt. The level will go down and its not all from evaporation. You are making some incredible statements that aren''''t backed up by observable science.

----------------
Posted by blh643 at 04:46 PM : Jul 08, 2008

OMG!
How can I possibly have a debate with someone who cannot understand the concept of displacement? Here is the experiment you need to do: Get a glass of water, put some ice in it. Make sure the ice is floatimg and not resting on the bottom or sides. Mark the level of the water. Let the ice melt. The level of the water wil not change.
Democracy is fundimetally flawed. The votes of people who do not understand the most basic concepts of physics count the same as mine!
+
They are talking about ice melting from the land on the pole, not the ice already in the ocean.
Ice melting just fromthat which is already inthe water will not change sea level, but the ice fromthe contiental shelf (from the land) as it slides into the ocean will dramatically change the sea level.

[flajoe1]

I think someone needs to set a glass of ice water on the table and let the ice melt. -----

Posted by blh643 at 04:46 PM : Jul 08, 2008

Do you sit around and watch the paint dry and the grass grow too? :-)

[floydzepp2]

oh I see. If you dare to question then you have a sub high school education. Well my sub high school education taught me water expands when fronzen, thus when ice floating in water melts then the overall level of the water goes down. So how would the level of the oceans not change with this melt? Are you saying the amount of ice in the North Pole is insignificant? Perhaps you should learn to debate without letting your emotion get in the way. Even your superior education should have taught you civility, or are you to radical to even debate?

Posted by blh643 at 04:31 PM : Jul 08, 2008
---------

Obviously your High School teacher didn''t teach you that if you melted all of the land-based glaciers that the EXTRA water introduced into the oceans would raise the water level enough to almost sink all of Florida.

[pepperp1]

Cheney needs to be tried for crimes against our country, doofus that he is%u2026%u2026and he is reason number one why NOT to vote for Obama another clueless Political Party Puppet King who will be fiddling just for a different set of special interest

[gwagener]

I think someone needs to set a glass of ice water on the table and let the ice melt. The level will go down and its not all from evaporation. You are making some incredible statements that aren''t backed up by observable science.

----------------
Posted by blh643 at 04:46 PM : Jul 08, 2008

OMG!
How can I possibly have a debate with someone who cannot understand the concept of displacement? Here is the experiment you need to do: Get a glass of water, put some ice in it. Make sure the ice is floatimg and not resting on the bottom or sides. Mark the level of the water. Let the ice melt. The level of the water wil not change.
Democracy is fundimetally flawed. The votes of people who do not understand the most basic concepts of physics count the same as mine!

[floydzepp2]

Obviously your High School teacher didn''''t teach you that if you melted all of the land-based glaciers that the EXTRA water intorduced into the oceans would raise the water level enough to almost sink all of Florida.

Posted by FloydZepp2 at 04:54 PM : Jul 08, 2008

[martel_v]

For those who have no clue what they''re posting about, the melt of the north polar ice cap will affect the weather in a pretty dramatic way but is of much less significance than the eventual melt of the south polar ice cap. However, the melt of the Arctic ice cap hastens the eventual melting of the Antarctic ice cap.

90 percent of the world''s ice and 70 percent of the world''s fresh water is in the Antarctic. When it starts to melt significantly, as it will because the ocean and air are both warming significantly, we''re all in deep water. If it should ever melt completely, the sea level would rise about 200 feet.

By that time, though, the sea level rise would be the very least of our problems. In fact, by the time the sea rises 15 feet, it will be the least of our problems...unless you live on a coastline, or in the Netherlands, for example.

[gwagener]

oh I see. If you dare to question then you have a sub high school education. Well my sub high school education taught me water expands when fronzen, thus when ice floating in water melts then the overall level of the water goes down. So how would the level of the oceans not change with this melt? Are you saying the amount of ice in the North Pole is insignificant? Perhaps you should learn to debate without letting your emotion get in the way. Even your superior education should have taught you civility, or are you to radical to even debate?

---------------------------

Posted by blh643 at 04:31 PM : Jul 08, 2008

Now this is exactly what I was talkijg about. You do not understand the concept of displacement. I told you that floatimg ice does not change the level of the water when it melts. I will explain. An object in water will displace an equal mass of water. The ice has about 90% of the density of the water that surrounds it. Therefore, the ice floats and about 10% of its volume floats above the water. When the ice melts, the desity of the water it produces is equal to the water around it, so it fills the displaced volume. You shuold have learned this in junior high science class. Anyone who got a C- in High school science understands this.