Thursday, April 15, 2010

Some Thoughts On Cap And Trade

This comes from a veterinarian, who knows bull$hit when he sees or smells it, and that is what the Obama Administration's "cap and trade" legislation is. This veterinarian is simply pointing out the obvious. This follows the absurdity of the EPA labelling carbon dioxide as a "pollutant". We had better wake up to what the liberal, leftist Democrats, led by Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are trying to put over on us!

Cap and Trade

What is this and what does it mean for veterinary medicine?

Speaker of the House
Nancy Pelosi

What is she doing and why?

Commentaries on Cap and Trade

It is fair to say that veterinarians are not experts on matters of the environment, chemistry, physics, and climatology. On the other hand, to enter veterinary school one must at least pass or survive a prerequisite amount of college courses pertaining to the basic sciences, such as chemistry, biology, physics, animal science, toxicology, etc. While in veterinary school, we certainly learn about the interactions and effects of chemicals and physical forces upon living systems, be it animal or human. It comes as no surprise to most customers that as veterinarians we become quite experienced in dealing with matters pertaining to elimination, be it of the urinary tract or digestive tract. To get to the point, be it feces, excrement, bowel movements, or "bullshit", we learn to recognize it and call it what it is.

For simplicity and time efficiency, I outline my thoughts on this subject.

1. Cap and Trade is based upon the assumption that CO2 emissions cause "global warming" in a significant manner.

2. There is no definitive proof of this concept. It is controversial.

3. Nancy Pelosi refused to hear testimony or introduce a 95 page report from a senior EPA scientist refuting the claims that CO2 Emissions are causing global warming. For starters, the global temperature is not rising. Other groups of scientists are being ignored as well.

4. The effects of the Cap and Trade legislation will drastically tax and increase the cost of production of electricity in the United States, especially in Texas, since coal is the primary source of electricity generation. Some estimates suggest a rapid doubling upon the prices of electricity.

5. Large polluting countries like China and India will likely continue to ignore such measures, continuing to be price competitive, and take more and more jobs from America. Is there anything else that's not made in China or serviced in India? That's why we owe China so much debt. This debt makes the value of the American money worth less and less.

6. If the cost of electricity for this animal clinic goes from $12,000 a year to $24,000, I will have to pass on such costs to customers. Other businesses will in turn pass on their costs, drastically raising the cost of veterinary medicine.

7. If our nation's leaders wish to burn less coal for electricity generation, they should make it possible to build more nuclear power plants or petroleum or natural gas powered plants, not tax the prices of our electricity.

8. I am all for preserving resources and taking care of the environment, but taking draconian measures that automatically punish users of electricity, small and large, based upon highly debated science is inappropriate.

9. When legislation doesn't seem to make sense, always "follow the money trail". I will provide some other links to help in this matter.



Anonymous said...

Some time ago, Pete and I got into a bit of a fracas over the quality, even the legitimacy, of his source material. At issue was whether the people Pete had cross-posted were qualified enough, and even smart enough, to be taken seriously as commentators on issues like AGW and the the like.

And here we have a veterinarian. Last I checked, veterinarians worked on animals, not climate science, politics, or economics. But sure, let's put our faith in anybody, no matter their qualifications, as long as they make us feel good about our misinformation, right Pete?

Peter said...

What pray tell us, makes your opinion any more "valid" than that of a broadly educated veterinarian? Whoever you are, you're being a sanctimonious ass.

Anonymous said...

Well, noting makes my opinion any more valid than a "broadly educated" veterinarian. But my opinion does not matter in context of climate science.

Whose opinion should we be concerned with? Why, the climate scientists, of course. Not the veterinarians (who are "expertly educated" in the cures, injuries, and pathologies of animals).

When you post things like this, Pete, I know for certain that you are not, in fact, a scientist. If you were you would understand - as most of the general public does - that scientists and science professionals, such as veterinarians, actually have a very narrow range of scientific understanding. They are very specifically trained. This is why I would go to a veterinarian if my dog had developed a cough and a climate scientist if I had questions about global warming.

I see you learned nothing since last time we corresponded when you were happy to believe anyone as long as they A) had some sort of advanced degree and B) agreed with your preconceived notions.

Whoever you are, you're being an obtuse ass.

Peter said...

When you say the following, at least you have this much right:

"But my opinion does not matter in context of climate science."

So you don't think your opinion matters except in matters that you are an "expert" in? Do you know what, that makes you a sheep, an ignorant blind fool following the herd to the slaughterhouse, unable and unwilling to think for yourself.

You've been well conditioned to conform. It is no wonder you have bought into the myth of man-caused global warming. How many other of life's obvious mistakes have you fallen for? Hopefully you're no longer in any position of influence, if you ever were.

Perhaps you were an abused child.

Anonymous said...

No, no, no, Pete, learn to read.

Your opinion is not important. My opinion is not important. The scientists? Now their opinion is important.

I am in a position of authority.
I had a very happy childhood.
And all this invective means I'm kicking your rhetorical ass!!


Peter said...

You say:
"I am in a position of authority."

That is truly a frightening thought. Have we really sunk that low? Whoever has granted you authority is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, actually I'm in charge of nuclear warhead disposal. Texas seems like a good place to me. Any thoughts?

Anonymous said...

I'm sure you can barely take care of your own garbage.

Anonymous said...

That was actually pretty funny, Anon.

However, I'll have you know that my garage was voted best in the county two years in a row. So there.

Oh yeah, what's this a blog about...?