Thothblog

Have any of you had the chance to do this?  This is truly…enlightening.  After watching a daily show from last week tonight I got into quite a tizzy after listening to Henry Waxman bash all non-democrats.  If I were a democrat or republican and heard someone who “represented” me speaking this way, I would be ashamed.

So I came upstairs to email my congressmen and all that.  I got to looking at gov documents and came across the Greenhouse gas inventory EPA document (ended up there after trying to understand some of the earkmarks Degette is trying to put through).  So I am reading through this document, looking at some tables and what not.  Interesting reading.  So I get to this point and I have to reread this a couple times just to make sure I am reading this correctly.  Now unlike our government representatives I will actually present sources, but here is what the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) wrote.  I listed the acronym so no one would read this and think Elephant Pension Allotment or other such nonsense…

It read, talking about contributing factors to why the percentage is higher: “cooler winters and warmer summer conditions in 2007 than in 2006 increased the demand for heating fuels and contributed to the demand in increase for electricity.”
http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads09/InventoryUSGhG1990-2007.pdf   bottom of page ES-3

So think about this for a second.  Greenhouse gases went up 1.4 percent supposedly.  Ok so this lead to it getting warmer…ok 1.4 percent must be a huge increase to change the temperature in such a measurable way, but I will give on the moment.  cooler winters and warmer summers increased the demand for heating fuels.  Ok so because the country was warmer we had to use more fuel to stay….warmer?!  Wait…what???

How does that work?  In what bizzarro world do warmer temperatures increase the need for heating elements?  What editor took of that day and who wrote this to begin with?  Thankfully the EPA is not burdened by that whole cause and effect situation.

“Johnson, get the numbers in the document and add these conclusions, On the double.”

“Uh, sir, these conclusions make no sense when they numbers are right before them.”

” HAH, sounds great Johnson, On the Double!”

Sometimes pointing out the stupidity of certain groups lacks of challenge….