Environmental ratings for Florida delegation

The League of Conservation Voters' 2006 "Environmental Scorecard''  finds that Florida's U.S. House members averaged 39 percent in terms of supporting LCV positions. The full scorecard is here, and the Florida ratings here:

Senator Martinez                           0%
Senator Bill Nelson                       57%                                                                                  
Rep. Miller (01)                              8%                                                    
Rep. Boyd (02)                             33%                                                   
Rep. Brown (03)                           92%                                                   
Rep. Crenshaw (04)                        8%                                                    
Rep. Brown-Waite (05)                   17%
Rep. Stearns (06)                           8%
Rep. Mica (07)                               0%
Rep. Keller (08)                            17%
Rep. Bilirakis (09)                          25%
Rep. Young (10)                           50%
Rep. Davis (11)                           100%
Rep. Putnam (12)                            8%
Rep. Harris (13)                             25%
Rep. Mack (14)                             17%
Rep. Weldon (15)                           0%
Rep. Foley (16)                            58%
Rep. Meek (17)                            92%
Rep. Ros-Lehtinen(18)                  33%
Rep. Wexler (19)                        100%
Rep. Wasserman Schultz (20)       100%
Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (21)          17%
Rep. Shaw (22)                           50%
Rep. Hastings (23)                        92%
Rep. Feeney (24)                          8%
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (25)            17%

Comments

As the Republicans will tell you, Global warming doesn't exist, so a grade of zero, should actually be considered 100.

I wish i got a 100% in school when i never went

Your a republican, so you would not have a chance at 100% no matter what the circumstance. Remove a zero, and now you're talking. The only 100% a republican will get is Charlie's perfect score from GLBT.

And these people try to say they're nonpartisan? They will never be relevant as long as they are so skewed.

Their grades are absolutely bogus and unrealistic. They grade every tiny vote, they want absolutely no development where any tree exists, they want to preserve anything they can, even if no animal life exists there.

BTW, global warming exists, but it is inconclusive to a large majority of scientists whether humans are causing it, or if it is natural changes.

But you are aware that 1930's were hotter than today, and for that matter, the 1400's were hotter than today. What were the people doing back then to cause the warming, were the horses farting a lot?

Are you also aware that ice caps on Mars are also melting, and at approximately the same pace as earth, according to a study in March of 2006.

You are also aware that there was a little ice age from 1500 to 1850. What would you expect to happen after a mini ice age? Earth warming, bingo!!!

Canadian government officials are now screaming at their funded scientists for letting them join Kyoto, for new evidence in the last 6 years has shown clear contradictions to the false claims that Kyoto produced.

This should start some mudslinging... Let it begin liberals...

Oh yea, one more thing, i know liberals are going crazy linking hurricanes to global warming... Check the hurricane activity in the 1930's, and the 1960's. Just as active as today.

Plus just this year the atlantic ocean cooled 1.4 degrees F, in ONE year. The pacific ocean has risen, 1.4 degrees F, in ONE year. Hmmm, global warming shifted the heat from one ocean basin to another, or could it be natural changes, like hurricane forecasting scientists have been claiming for 100 years.

guess who doesnt give a fig for the future, ur children or grandchildren?
right...the publiskums!!
"come on down an dpave anything and everything! we gots to make $$ now, before we all die!"

Guess who is fixing the Everglades? Republicans. Guess who has spent billions of dollars buying environmental lands? Republicans. Guess who has aggressively cleaned up our streams, springs and rivers? Republicans. I could go on and on, but I've got work to do.

11:24

Typical liberal response to FACTS. Just spout an ignorant line that republicans only care about money, and ignore all the FACTS that show that global warming is natural, and not man made.

11:31- Don't forget Keller blocked the sale of the Ocala National Forest.

[realbluedemocrat]

I really like the comparisons that the conservatives are making, 1930's and 1400's. Wow let us compare 200 years out of 4.6 Billion. Climate scientists compare global trends over thousands and million years. The greenland ice core records go back over 400,000 years.

Yes the Holocene was warmer than the Pleistocene. We were coming out of an ice age. Looking at the global curves we should be coming out of an inter glacial phase. Might I recommend William Ruddiman's Earth CLimate Past and Present as a starter,

[realbluedemocrat]

11:24 No response when facts are pointed out to you. I will gladly argue global warming with you. Would you like to discuss the Greenland ice cores (Which one GRIP or GISP), the Milankovitch cyles, the change in the epihelion or perihelion and how each one of those affects global climate. Or maybe the move of the ITCZ and how it effects global climate and the Atlantic Conveyor belt. Please tell me or did you not make it past earth science in High School.

10:35---
We all know that Charlie can't get a 100% from any GLBT groups... GLBT groups HATE self-hating homosexuals who vote againts themselves and their people.

[realbluedemocrat]

11:35 I really fell left out. Quick remarks when you can attack a liberal who is passionate, but when a Liberal is armed with the facts and research, no response.

[realbluedemocrat]

Or would you like to talk about how the closing of Panama changed the climate here in FLorida, which worldwide proxy would you like to discuss: Rock Varnish, Ostracods, Charcoal, Shells, Pollen, loess, ocean sediments, which location Cariaco Basin, or my favorite the Arabian Sea, or the global O16/O18 change worlwide.

[realbluedemocrat]

11:35 Would you say that I am spouting against Republicans?

Oh, wait I am ready to argue facts from some of the top scientific journals.

Then again the conservative movement is not the biggest supporter of independent peer reviewed science education.

all republicans know how to do is scream liberal, liberal, liberal. in the meantime, they offer nothing as far as environmental protection. they cite biblical verses as justification for screwing up this planet. why can't they open their eyes before we reach the point of no return?

[realbluedemocrat]

Where have all the conservatives gone?

RBD,

I was gone for over an hour, you have to give time for a response. Just spouting big complex words does not mean you have the correct facts and argument. None of your facts you presented show that humans caused global warming.

the atlantic conveyor current, one of those many items you talked about, naturally slows when the earth warms, it has happened many times before, so what does that have to do with proving humans caused it.

[realbluedemocrat]

If you look at the proxies of the Greenland Ice Cores they show and oscilating pattern that has been interuptted the last 200 years.

Check the citation.

[realbluedemocrat]

Also if you look at O16/O18 curves worldwide you will see that there is an increase enrichment of O18 around the world. This recent change has not been shown in past oscillations.

so the oscillating pattern was "SUPPOSEDLY" interrupted for the last 200 years huh, well we didnt even discover ANYTHING in relation to oil until 1859, and were not even producing any significant amount until 1890.

So what upset the pattern when we were still all horse and buggy, barely any use of electricity at all..???

[realbluedemocrat]

you are arguing a fifty year change over a 400,000 year record an error of 0.0125% of the entire record.

[realbluedemocrat]

Are you also going to ask me if I am going to celebrate the beginning of the earth in November? That was the churches calculation.

That would be an 80 year change. Plus the industrial revolution was not even in full force until 1922-1930. So really it is a 120 year change.

Plus 1400 was hotter than today, and not only was the ocean not higher than today, but the south tip of Greenland was being farmed, and that area was only 5-15 feet above sea level.

Scientists have shown that at all times, there are amounts of ice, water, and water vapor. Studies of the 1400's showed much of the ice loss was replaced with water vapor increase, actually causing the sea level to drop a foot or so. Much of warming / cooling has been PROVEN to be a direct relationship to the sun's intensity and cloud cover.

Am i even talking about christianity at all. I didnt think so. You are losing since you dont have facts that prove humans are causing warming, so you just throw in some stupid christian comment.... How sad.

[realbluedemocrat]

You are citing the usage of Oil, but we used other carbon based fuels such as coal prior to 1890. The coal base industry was well developed before 1800.

[realbluedemocrat]

What is your citation on that? I have given you one author and citation, with a lead author in many Greenland core expeditions.

[realbluedemocrat]

Or maybe you could look at the research done by the Paleo Climate group at USF, You are talking about the Medival Warm Period which was then followed by the Little Ice Age. Those were natural fluctuations in the earths climate. Please look big picture not at little snap shots of earths history.

This is about the worst debate on global warming- pro and con- that i have read anywhere.

Factually incorrect on the right.

Lost in the weeds on the left.

RBD, you admit that scientists look at things from a geologic time perspective, meaning eras not centuries and yet you're willing to say the earth is doomed based upon 50 to 100 years of data? That's like saying an elephant is red and white, not grey, because it has a pimple on its ass.

2:40

The atmosphere on Mars is 95% carbon dioxide. Sort of what we're trying to avoid, my friend.

Get some air.

4:13

Come on man, what does that have to do with earth. My point has nothing to do with mars itself, but that the icecaps on Mars are melting, and according to the scientific research reported in march 2006, they are melting at the SAME rate as the earth's icecaps.

These findings support the fact that the sun is getting HOTTER. It is a star you know, and stars fluctuate in heat and strength.

4:18

It's one thing to write about other planets. It's another thing to blog like you're from another planet.

Do you have access to peer-reviewed studies from over there that you would care to reference?

[Paul D. Harvill]

The list sure shows who loves their children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren.....

And it is not the "family values" Republicans.

I love it when Republicans protest too much in their denial of the (very real) consequences of global warming. They stick their fingers in their ears and sing, "La-la-la-la-la-la! I'm not LISTening!!"

(Which is pretty much their solution for all kinds of problems facing this country, and this globe, these days...)

To be fair, there are some republicans who get it: JOhn McCain, for example. It's the tone deaf talking-point reading conservative sheep who spew off about global warming not existing.

I NEVER said global warming does not exist you comment twisting morons. Let me repost:

BTW, global warming exists, but it is inconclusive to a large majority of scientists whether humans are causing it, or if it is natural changes.

But you are aware that 1930's were hotter than today, and for that matter, the 1400's were hotter than today. What were the people doing back then to cause the warming, were the horses farting a lot?

When 1400 was hotter than today, and not only was the ocean not higher than today, but the south tip of Greenland was being farmed, and that area was only 5-15 feet above sea level.

Scientists have shown that at all times, there are amounts of ice, water, and water vapor. Studies of the 1400's showed much of the ice loss was replaced with water vapor increase, actually causing the sea level to drop a foot or so. Much of warming / cooling has been PROVEN to be a direct relationship to the sun's intensity and cloud cover.

Are you also aware that ice caps on Mars are also melting, and at approximately the same pace as earth, according to a study in March of 2006.

My point has nothing to do with mars itself, but that the icecaps on Mars are melting, and according to the scientific research reported in march 2006, they are melting at the SAME rate as the earth's icecaps.

These findings support the fact that the sun is getting HOTTER. It is a star you know, and stars fluctuate in heat and strength.

You are also aware that there was a little ice age from 1500 to 1850. What would you expect to happen after a mini ice age? Earth warming, bingo!!!

Oh yea, one more thing, i know liberals are going crazy linking hurricanes to global warming... Check the hurricane activity in the 1930's, and the 1960's. Just as active as today.

Plus just this year the atlantic ocean cooled 1.4 degrees F, in ONE year. The pacific ocean has risen, 1.4 degrees F, in ONE year. Hmmm, global warming shifted the heat from one ocean basin to another, or could it be natural changes, like hurricane forecasting scientists have been claiming for 100 years.

Canadian government officials are now screaming at their funded scientists for letting them join Kyoto, for new evidence in the last 6 years has shown clear contradictions to the false claims that Kyoto produced.

Got it liberals... good.