Senate Leader Harry Reid Touts Bike Paths As Transportation To Work
September 15, 2011
Harry Reid: "Well, for most Americans, [bike paths] are absolutely important. It's good for purposes of allowing people to travel, um, without burning all the fossil fuel on the highways. I got up this morning really early, and went out and did my exercise. I'm not exaggerating--scores!--at least 30 or 40 bikes--so scores may be a slight exaggeration--of people, not just for exercise, traveling to work. Backpacks on--they are going to work. That's what bike paths are all about!" http://www.youtube.com/embed/N2x6zHkDgPw
How much of Obama's Job Plan (new $450 billion Stimulus Bill) would be spent on mass transit and bikeways (or on highways connecting to mass transit and bikeways) if Oama could get it passed? In his earlier, failed 800 billion stimulus bill Obama set aside $100 billion (more than 10%) for energy grants to states and localities for global warming measures, and $17 billion for mass transit. In all our research we have found no money in the stimulus bill that did not promote Obama's and the liberal Democrat agenda. (See http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/009944.html for the amount of energy and mass transit grants.)
In Obama's recent jobs speech he mentioned mass transit twice as part of his new plan. In his latest budget proposal Obama called for $53 billion for the next six years for high-speed rail. Three governors have already turned down billions for fast rail in their states because it would cost their state taxpayers so much - taxpayers would have subsidized each train trip with $125 in Wisconsin. Now Reid is touting bikeways as a means of travel to work. Cars emit too much pollution and are going to destroy our plant, according to liberals. Evidently liberals know their alternative fuels are not workable so they are planning another route - walking & biking, rather than drilling for oil and using our own rich resources. See this link for the $53 billion for high-speed rail in Obama's proposed budget http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/16/florida-governor-joins-rejecting-federal-high-speed-rail-spending/
Liberals are spending all this money and planning to deny people their preferred transportation method (cars) based on global warming as a fact. Scientists all over the world have disagreed. For a link to the 31,000 scientists who signed the petition opposing the concept of global warming, see this link: http://www.petitionproject.org/signers_by_state_main.php
Just this week another Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Stated His Disagreement with global warming.
See this link for excerpts from that article on the scientist.
http://www.wpaag.org/Sus%20Dev%20-%20H%20%20Reid%20touts%20bike
paths%20for%20transportation.htm
or click on Thursday below.
Harry Reid: "Well, for most Americans, [bike paths] are absolutely important. It's good for purposes of allowing people to travel, um, without burning all the fossil fuel on the highways. I got up this morning really early, and went out and did my exercise. I'm not exaggerating--scores!--at least 30 or 40 bikes--so scores may be a slight exaggeration--of people, not just for exercise, traveling to work. Backpacks on--they are going to work. That's what bike paths are all about!" http://www.youtube.com/embed/N2x6zHkDgPw
How much of Obama's Job Plan (new $450 billion Stimulus Bill) would be spent on mass transit and bikeways (or on highways connecting to mass transit and bikeways) if Oama could get it passed? In his earlier, failed 800 billion stimulus bill Obama set aside $100 billion (more than 10%) for energy grants to states and localities for global warming measures, and $17 billion for mass transit. In all our research we have found no money in the stimulus bill that did not promote Obama's and the liberal Democrat agenda. (See http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/009944.html for the amount of energy and mass transit grants.)
In Obama's recent jobs speech he mentioned mass transit twice as part of his new plan. In his latest budget proposal Obama called for $53 billion for the next six years for high-speed rail. Three governors have already turned down billions for fast rail in their states because it would cost their state taxpayers so much - taxpayers would have subsidized each train trip with $125 in Wisconsin. Now Reid is touting bikeways as a means of travel to work. Cars emit too much pollution and are going to destroy our plant, according to liberals. Evidently liberals know their alternative fuels are not workable so they are planning another route - walking & biking, rather than drilling for oil and using our own rich resources. See this link for the $53 billion for high-speed rail in Obama's proposed budget http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/16/florida-governor-joins-rejecting-federal-high-speed-rail-spending/
Liberals are spending all this money and planning to deny people their preferred transportation method (cars) based on global warming as a fact. Scientists all over the world have disagreed. For a link to the 31,000 scientists who signed the petition opposing the concept of global warming, see this link: http://www.petitionproject.org/signers_by_state_main.php
Just this week another Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Stated His Disagreement with global warming.
See this link for excerpts from that article on the scientist.
http://www.wpaag.org/Sus%20Dev%20-%20H%20%20Reid%20touts%20bike
paths%20for%20transportation.htm
or click on Thursday below.
3 Comments:
Nobel prize winner for physics in 1973 Dr. Ivar Giaever resigned as a Fellow from the American Physical Society (APS) on September 13, 2011 in disgust over the group's promotion of man-made global warming fears. Climate Depot has obtained the exclusive email Giaever sent titled "I resign from APS" to APS Executive Officer Kate Kirby to announce his formal resignation.
Giaever announced his resignation from APS was due to the group's belief in man-made global warming fears. Giaever explained in his email to APS: "In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period."
Seems like if you're exercising, you would also be creating a larger carbon footprint. I think the travel efficiency goes train, car, then human powered. Also, eating a normal diet instead of just vegetables has a smaller footprint. The body has to work harder to digest veggies because they're less similar to people. Not that I believe in AGW.
I don't know that more carbon is even a bad thing. Why are the carbon levels that existed when these people were in college some kind of universal idea that we must change our behavior in order to force the planet to conform to?
Post a Comment
<< Home