16 votes

1,122 record low temperatures set in US this week

The story about Chris "Porky Pig" Christie took me to Drudge, where I then saw this a few stories down.

When will the Global Warming crazies admit any warming there was ended in the 90s, and that whatever warming or climate shifts there are, are not a result of man made emissions? Never, because then they can't regulate and tax us to death to fit their model life.


Global warming legislation will be devastating to poor people, making gas, food and electricity prices sky rocket. Then, people will claim the free market doesn't work, and that more government assisted is needed to make these things more affordable, and the problem will again be magnified.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I honestly don't understand how

otherwise rational people can be so hypocritical. If Bernanke posted here calling everyone a crazie nutjob because you can't get onboard with the monetary policy of the modern world, other posters here would eat him alive. There would be some name calling, sure, but mostly there would be factual evidence, historical events and thousands of fully supported, proven claims of corrupt influence. In short, when you're right and you know it, people tend to provide evidence to that effect. Name calling and obfuscation are techniques for avoiding real debate. That's evidence that you haven't got a case.

I long for the day when this topic can be just understood enough to even debate it rationally! (For example: Global warming and climate change are NOT the same thing. One influences the other and only one is perceptible by humans without instruments.) When we reach that point, maybe more people will see that there is much more to the debate than just "NWO wants to tax us!!!!!" GAWD, I can't stand that simplistic thinking. Of course they want that but don't you think big energy wants something too? How does the massive propaganda we're flooded with show these two as polar opposites for the same cause? Why is it that regardless of which side tells us what to think, neither is promoting any genuine solutions? (Hint the real solutions are local, better and cheaper but not shown on MSM or some BP commercial.)

Please, people. Just stop fighting FOR EXXON and BP just so you can fight against NWO or banks. Instead, let's fight all of them, including any government regulation at all, by simply solving the problem on our terms. Stay local.

One cool year doesn't prove

A climate pattern on planet Earth any more than 10 warm years, so this year doesn't advance the argument against man made climate change in any real way. It could however give technology time to understand Earth climate before the loonies start taxing sunshine. Although I believe Spain may have recently done just that. To little cooling too late I guess.

Nothing against the article, the content or the OP...

but trend data concerning global warming is taken at the poles, not the contiguous United States... just to clarify.

They will never even admit

They will never even admit their man-made ozone hole hoax. It's common sense really. CFCs are heavy. They would not gather in the upper atmosphere. The planet spins, so it would act like a centrifuge and propel them to the equator. The reason for the ozone holes is a product of the earth's tilt. Ozone (O3) is created when UV light strikes diatomic oxygen (O2). O2 is what filters most UV light, NOT O3. O3 has a lifetime. When the north pole is in its winter, it's not getting any sun, therefore no O3 production and the O3 death makes a "hole." Apply the same to the south pole for its winter. Both poles will ALWAYS and naturally have a thinner ozonosphere.

I saw somewhere years ago that they found out that R-12 was not that bad for the environment, when go ahead and read any R-134a label...it causes testicular cancer. Not can, does. It's not only considered safe to let R-134a leak into the atmosphere, it's encouraged. Computer duster spray is R-134a and other refrigerants and chemicals.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

I did not know that. Thanks

I did not know that. Thanks for the info.

Gold is relatively cheap.

R12 coolant is still available on eBay. Unfortunately, $1.00 cans of R12 are bygone memories. Now selling for around $40. Still the simplest solution is to remain with the refrigerant made for your cooler. For central A/C (HVAC) the R22 has gone from $28.00 per 30# cylinder to $250. to $300.

The price of gold & silver are relatively cheap.

The good news is the Fed reports low inflation. The Fed: Loaning you blind, since 1913.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Thank God for the Grand Solar

Thank God for the Grand Solar Minimum the Sun is going through right now. The colder planetary temperatures are necessary to force the man-made global warming carbon dioxide tax pushers to get off our backs. All the MSM brainwashing in the world won't take control of the Sun and make it go back to normal in order to sell the carbon tax.

Creating money out of thin air begets creating tax out of same.

The Infernal 1% Thin Air Tax Club. As if printing money our-of-thin-air ain't enough... Now they fix on taxing thin air too!

CO2 taxers are fools! They are taxing less than 1% of the air we breath. What will happen when they fix on taxing the other 99%?

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

The Infernal Less Than 1% Absurdity Climate Crowd All Agree!

CO2 is less than 1% of the air we breath.

This chart is posted on the British Broadcasting Corp (BBC).

Warming air has little to do with CO2. Measuring the temperature of Oxygen or Nitrogen doesn't explain much either. How about study of ocean temperature? Water? H2O?

All infernal climate change propaganda organs agree. Weather will change. If you are tuned to such nonsense, you may change the channel or turn off the idiotic box.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

"Global warming legislation will be devastating to

poor people".
Exactly as it has been planned to be. It will also make it much, much harder to start up or maintain a small to medium sized business.
Want to help put a stop to the new, sustainable face of communism?

Half of North American was

Half of North American was literally covered in a mile of ice just 12,000 years ago. yes the planet's climate is changing, just as it always has.

Liberal 'Environmentalists'

Liberal 'Environmentalists' are so stupid. My girlfrend is an Environmental Studies major and she got in a huge fight with her online class over the global warming scam. There was even a kid that complained he hates WalMart but is living check to check and has to shop there. A week later he said he supports an additional $.90 tax on gas to encourage people to buy electric cars...

Besides the global goverment aspect, Global Warming is so subversive to sustainability in that it makes people ignore real environmental issues such as:

1. There is a giant cesspool of plastic bits the size of Texas floating in the pacific ocean.

2. Thanks to natural gas fracking, people in CO have their well water catch on fire. As in they put a lighter to their facet and it ignites! Now Obama wants to push Natural Gas and the EPA ignores all these reports.

3. Cancer rates and Autism have been skyrocketing due to all the crap we put in our bodies.

But the fact Earth may be a couple degrees warming is surely worse than that lol

We all share this eternally evolving present moment- The past and future only exist as inconsequential mental fabrications.

Frac'ing not fracking...

is not as controversial as HBO and the MSM would lead you to believe. Josh Fox's "Gasland" was financed by entities in the middle east bent on protecting OPEC's monopoly. Prince Alwaleed of Saudi Arabia just wrote to the Saudi Oil Minister that frac'ing is a huge threat to OPEC. Check out the documentary "Fracknation" for some truth to the technology. Also, it's hydraulic fracturing shortened to "frac'ing" by scientists and engineers and "fracking" to MSM types. You will find google searches of the two yield COMPLETELY different results. I fully agree with you on the other counts, however. Cheers.

Interesting take on Josh Fox

Interesting take on Josh Fox and "Gasland" from what I have seen from Fracknation so far. In any case, thank you for bringing the other side to my attention. In looking back, Gasland did rely heavily on dramatic case examples rather than statistical data which is usually a red flag. I am going to have to look into this one more as there are heavily vested interests on both sides and there is no shortage of info/disinfo to dig through.

We all share this eternally evolving present moment- The past and future only exist as inconsequential mental fabrications.

Just a question to you, Sir:

I'm not saying your argument is wrong, but are VRC's such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene okay to drink?

I'm just wondering because those are the chemicals (among 750 others that are not biodegradeable/naturally occuring) that have been found in the drinking waters of all frac'ing/fracking states.

Bush Jr. also exempted fracking/frac'ing companies from the Safe Water Drinking Act so they could specifically "not disclose the chemicals used in frac'ing/fracking."


Maybe my source is not credible? I dunno, you tell me.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Of course you wouldn't drink those.

And I'm not saying that those chemicals haven't been found in the drinking water (although I would like to see a source for that). However, consider that people have been lighting their waterwells on fire long before hydraulic fracturing existed. Those chemicals do, in fact, exist in reservoirs where biogenic methane exists (which would explain both why you can light the water on fire and why those chemicals are there). This may come as a suprise, but biogenic methane near surface is a good indicator that hydrocarbons exist in reservoirs much deeper. This may explain why oil and gas drilling commences in those locations. Correlation does not imply causation.

Also, frac'ing has been done commercially since the 1950s. Most wells in this country have been frac'ed at least once. The US has around half of the world's wells. It has been proven time and again to be safe for water aquifers, which incidentally are separated, by casing (pipe), cement and thousands of feet of rock.

I'm a skeptic myself, and probably why I love this website. I work in O&G and I question everything. This is one thing I feel strongly about. Be a skeptic. It's good to ask questions- and don't just trust my answer. I think "Fracknation" is a good documentary, but not fully complete.

BTW- yes, fracfocus is a great resource. Fracfocus is an example of a free market coalition getting together to efficiently do what gov'ts will never be able to do.


For your source question:


That's not Scientific fact, but I just tried to find a "somewhat credible" news source. I don't believe everything the HuffPo says but they seem to be a little more accurate than Fox/CNN.

I agree that Correlation does not imply causation, but I would think an "environmental detective" would probably think these chemicals are a little suspicious, no?

And I agree (in part) that the US probably has some of the more "safe" drinking water, but I have issues with the EPA calling anything "safe to drink" after they raised the radiation "safe" limit after fukushima.


Again, no evidence that the EPA is "directly harming the people it's suppose to protect," just a little suspicious in light of no investigation done by the US.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Good Post, good conversation.

I normally think HuffPo is mularkey, but this article isn't that bad. All it really says is that the chemicals were injected, which is really no news. In fact, fracfocus was built to reveal exactly that. Towards the end they go on to talk about proprietary fluids. This is huge. Much like Coca-Cola has a secret formula to make Coke Classic, many of the service companies have spent millions in R&D to develop fluids and fluid additives. Everyone knows the basic ingredients in Coke (water sugar etc.), but the formula for how to create it is a secret. The same is true here. The service companies do not want to disclose anything beyond just the chemicals being injected. The chemicals that make up the slurries are known, but the concentrations are proprietary, and a range is given. For instance they may say 10-50% of "X" solvent is xylene. Essentially, we know it's been pumped and we know a good range of what has been pumped. Just a note here solvents are usually pumped at concentrations around 0.1-1 gallons per thousand gallons, so around 0.01-.1% (so 10-50% of that would be xylene). Most of the slurry is water and sand 95-99.5% on average.

I'm with you on the EPA. I'm happy a liberal administration vindicated frac', but at the same time I don't trust them. And in my mind that made no difference in determining my opinion on hydraulic fracturing.

There are a lot of interested parties in developing shale plays here in the US. The biggest interests are OPEC and Russia. Additionally, there are the environmentalists and (believe it or not) the coal mining groups. We have such abundant natural resources today that 20 years ago were never dreamed recoverable. We could see a radical change the geo-political landscape, especially when it comes to the Middle East and Russia. Fracknation does a good job of showing how Russia has actively campaigned against frac' in Western Europe (it's outlawed in France) so they can continue to be (pretty much) the sole source of natural gas to Europe.

Interesting stuff, no doubt. Probably a good topic for the DP at some point. I do my best to read the literature, and to be quit honest, there has never been a solid, scientific study to show even a single instance of a frac' job polluting a drinking water aquifer.

Do you

Talk about anything other than fracking?

Not really

O&G is one of my only areas of expertise and I don't feel very comfortable commenting to people I can't see about things I'm not completely confident in.

Could be

That could be why you were chosen to be a mole.

Thanks you both for the discussion

I almost commented before as, I too, work in O&G and have a favorable view of frac'ing... I would like to add that in instances where environmental problems have occurred it is primarily due to operators trying to cut corners to save drilling costs. An example would be re-completing an old well bore that has a poor/old cement job and/or crappy casing up-hole. Operators use frac'ing to open up tight/low permeable rocks so that the oil/gas can effectively flow into the well-bore. The reservoirs are typically at depths MUCH deeper than water reservoirs so contamination of the water is near impossible unless through leaking casing and/or cement.

As to the chemicals... go look at the name of the chemicals under your sink... these are much worse for the environment and used AT the surface (not at 5,000-10,000 ft below the surface)... not to mention frac fluids are composed primarily of water with small amounts of the chemicals mentioned on tv, gasland, etc..

On top of that... most oil reservoirs also produce water... This produced water or brine, is 'contaminated' by anyones standard whether the well was stimulated or not. Frac fluid is 'clean' relative to the fluid that was already there.

I would also like to add that the main concern i have with frac'ing is the amount of fresh water that is uses; especially in places where we are in a serious drought, like Texas. We need to start (as companies have been trying) to clean up the produced water I previously mentioned in order to use as frac water. Right now we are pumping CLEAN water from the surface with additives down the pipe to never be seen again... Well some of it will be recovered but 'properly' disposed of... You probably don't hear of the real concerns like this in the MSM though because that would make them acknowledge that frac water isn't so bad.

Thank you guys for the discussion and for not making it an argument... I know this is a topic where people on both sides are fairly stuck in their ways so it is good to see people come together with a real discussion.


proverbs 20:15
There is gold, and an abundance of jewels;
But the lips of knowledge are a more precious thing.


I work in Wyoming currently for an operator as an engineer. I used to work as a frac' engineer for a Major service company. I've pumped jobs in WY, ND and CO. You're spot on about everything you say.

It's interesting you bring up the fresh water use. I would agree. I know of several different operations, and used to work on one in Western Wyoming where recycled flow back water and produced water are being used. This radically changes the dynamics of the fluid system, but we are learning how to make it work. I just attended a conference where Halliburton presented a 100% food grade quality frac' fluid capable of transporting high proppant concentrations and compatible with most of their additives. We are getting better fast.

I would add to your list of things not to like about frac' road traffic. Those locations are usually in BFE and thus the dirt roads stir up quite a bit of particulate. But there's not much you can do about that- wind mills and solar panels are in BFE as well.

So do you work in the Eagleford, or midland, or one of the other prolific oil field in TX? Cheers.

Permian Basin

The company I work for is a start up so we are not active right now.. just screening deals.. I am a geologist though and focus primarily on the Permian Basin in W. Texas... Good to see fellow Liberty-minded people in the industry!

proverbs 20:15
There is gold, and an abundance of jewels;
But the lips of knowledge are a more precious thing.

One of those dots was my

One of those dots was my station. Record Low High temp.

Only hit 72 the other day, usually 100. And 43 at dawn....


Weather is racist, shit.

Weather is racist, shit.

Southern Agrarian