Global-warming zealots to ban ice makers

icemakerEnergy efficiency standards to expand scope of product confiscation

Washinton Times Editorial

Ice makers are the latest target in the left’s ongoing war against the conveniences of modern life. Earlier this month, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued a report that may condemn this essential household item to the contraband list that already includes functional light bulbs, toilets, washing machines and showerheads.

Those looking for an easy way to cool down their drinks with ice cubes are guilty of increasing their refrigerator’s energy consumption by about 12 to 20 percent. That’s unacceptable to global-warming alarmists at the Department of Energy (DOE) who are hard at work finalizing regulatory standards for the fridge. The proposed changes will increase prices by an estimated $2 billion per year, but DOE justifies this added expense by claiming consumers would save $37 in electricity costs over the lifetime of a typical side-by-side.

Read the rest at the Washington Times.

133 Responses to Global-warming zealots to ban ice makers

  1. Rob N. Hood May 15, 2011 at 9:26 am #

    Paul- you brought it up, I didn’t. So your own comments don’t have true meaning? What candor and honesty… thank you.

  2. V May 15, 2011 at 11:31 am #

    What happened to the other 94 posts? Horrible moderation, this is pure censorship and nothing but. Absolute garbage. Good bye and good riddance.

    • Dan McGrath May 16, 2011 at 1:59 pm #

      The comment thread exceeds 100 and is displaying only the newest posts. Try the “older comments” link. Goodbye.

  3. V May 15, 2011 at 11:44 am #

    This site is nothing but conspiracist rubbish. AGW is very much real, unlike anything posted in this blog. We have hard scientific data that supports AGW. Recorded real world events. It doesn’t get more plain than that. Denying data is just plain irresponsible. If you want to play scientist go out and collect your own data. If you’re unwilling or unable to do so your input is worthless. And it is. This site is unscientific and irresponsible. You are creating a following and convincing others that AGW is a scam. It is not. The science behind the findings is sound and more advanced than any of you conspiracists can understand.

    • Jerk A. Knot May 18, 2011 at 1:29 pm #

      Really??? Hard data that was deleted after it was adjusted. Sience is all about truth and baselines. When you alter rew data you are supose to keep it and “show you work” so that your conclusions can stand up to examination. BUT whenever your examined you cry scream attacking thoes that do so as illogical idoits that just deny the facts in front of them. When in fact thoes facts have been altered to meet the desired conclusion. I call them as I see them and I call them all as liers. For the most part the proponets of AGW have lost their credability.

    • SmokeP August 1, 2011 at 12:04 pm #

      New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

  4. Rob N. Hood May 15, 2011 at 6:37 pm #

    V, you should take your own advice and not get into this trap… trying to speak logically and rationally just doesn’t reach some people. I actually have a fairly open mind about this issue believe it or not. You wouldn’t know that though from all the antagonism I get from these guys. They won’t see any middle ground or try to meet you halfway about anything… and they’re actually proud of that. It’s a waste of time and effort. Sure it’s enjoyable to make them mad (not hard) and to tease them about their problem solving skills, etc. but that is really immature too, and I’ll admit it. But these kind of people, in my opinion, really do hold us all back and make things worse with their ignorance and voting habits. But they feel the same way about us, and NOTHING is going to change that. We know we yield to reason and logic. The problem is they think they do to. Luckily for us, to see the glass half full, is that they are in the minority, most of the time. They have become the true radicals and extremists. And just like the real Leftys in the 60’s (whom I admire) they will eventually fade away and remain victims of the power elite, just like everyone else. I just wish they could recognize who the most damaging ones are… but they don’t and won’t. Bias and ego-centrism is very strong in them and they can’t or won’t recognize that.

    • Jerk A. Knot May 18, 2011 at 1:31 pm #


      By your defination Reason = deception
      Logic = lies

      • Rob N. Hood May 19, 2011 at 8:23 am #

        Jerk, only someone who cannot discern the difference would say that. As I pointed out before, if you and I beleive the opposite to be truth, reason and logic then one of us has to be wrong. At best that gives you a 50% of being wrong, yet you don’t seem to be bothered by that at all. And that, truly, is a huge problem with the Right. Cannot see the forest for the biased ego-centric trees. Opinion is just that. It doesn’t make you correct or able to recognize illogic or lack of reason. And actually the inability to think logically and reasonably would then make it very difficult for you to recognize that in someone else, would it not? I know I’m not convincing you, but it truly would be worth while thinking about and analyzing. Bottom line is this- we all let our biases get in the way. Some of us, however, recognize our biases and work to avoid the mistake of letting those biaes get in the way of true wisdom and truth. Are we always successful in that? Of course not. But more often than the people who don’t even try, or can’t admit that to themselves, and are too self-satisfied and lazy to use their brains to challenge themselves in that way. And a little paranoia thrown in doesn’t seem to hurt either. (i.e. you seem to assume by lazy default that I’m trying to deceive and lie). Wow. Oh yee of little faith…

  5. paul wenum May 15, 2011 at 8:18 pm #

    Never changes.

  6. Rob N. Hood May 16, 2011 at 7:15 am #

    No, you don’t.

  7. paul wenum May 18, 2011 at 8:10 pm #

    Climate change is a natural occurance and by the way, I love ice-makers.

  8. Rob N. Hood May 19, 2011 at 8:27 am #

    And so even if humans are exacerbating it we should ignore it despite the risk we are taking regarding our own ability to survive as a species? Let alone our stewardship of the entire planet and it’s other flora/fauna…? So we’ve learned nothing via science and other unsuccessful (extinct) societies, that cut their noses off to spite their faces? Are we that lazy and/or dumb?

  9. paul wenum May 19, 2011 at 9:01 pm #

    Prove you are correct in your assumption..

  10. Rob N. Hood May 20, 2011 at 9:57 am #

    Prove that you are… (gosh this seems juvenile and pointless…). After my latest diatribes against you self-deluded know-nothings I feel I really need to end my time here. I feel I’m becoming dumber… and meaner…. and more like you guys.

  11. paul wenum May 22, 2011 at 10:02 pm #

    Simply answer the question.

  12. paul wenum May 22, 2011 at 11:13 pm #

    It is “End of times.” Bye.

  13. Rob N. Hood May 23, 2011 at 7:14 am #

    Again, I did answer the question as best as could be done. It appears you love pissing contests more than anyone here. I guess I have to interpret my logic to you, again. There is no way you can prove your “assumption” any more than I can, or anyone for that matter. As a matter of fact, even when I do post more fact based and/or detail re: my beliefs you all either simply ignore it, dismiss it out of hand, or come back with your own “facts” without any matching discourse based on any logic or reasoning. So it’s a no win situation, which I believe is what Rightys love. If they cannot win they want everyone to lose. What patriotism… wow. Oh, bye Paul…

  14. paul wenum May 26, 2011 at 9:49 pm #

    I only use that word when I have to relieve myself. I’m used to people answering direct questions. In my business I try to take no prisoners.

  15. Bartholomew J. Cornwacker May 26, 2011 at 10:23 pm #

    O.K., just to clear the air here. Global warming, or climate change, whatever you wish to call it, is EVIDENTLY very real. It MAY be happening now, it has EVIDENTLY happened before, many times (Pleistocene and Holocene phases). What is not realistic is the idea that we puny humans can do anything about it ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. What’s more, I am not in the least bit impressed by a left-wing liberal politician spouting off about our responsibilities to the environment on one hand and then zipping about the globe in a private jet and living on an estate that consumes more (fossil-fueled) energy than a small mid-western town. This, to me, is purest hypocrisy, aimed only at making more money with false propaganda/fear-mongering. He is sure making a lot of money on ignorance – pretty smart when you think about it. So smart, in fact, that other left-wing-nuts have successfully pulled off similar scams- campaigning about ‘leveling the playing filed’ and ‘spreading wealth’ and as soon as this con artist was elected, did the exact opposite (AIG, BOA, the list goes on…) with the exact same methods used so successfully by other lying politicians. Oh, please pardon my digression, back to the original subject. Climate change is inevitable, if you believe the science behind ice core sample dating which supposedly tells us that this climate change is just part of a fairly regular pattern. When the flat-earth propagandists can keep a volcano from erupting, rope a tornado and hog-tie it, or control the direction of a hurricane, then (and only then) will I believe that anyone but the Lord affect climate change – and HE will do so if it suits HIS purpose.

  16. Rob N. Hood May 27, 2011 at 7:31 am #

    Heil Paul!

  17. paul wenum May 27, 2011 at 10:42 pm #

    If you were deposed you would under oath have to answer. Answer the simple question. I now know why the left wing liberals have a problem in connecting with the average person. You nevef give a direct honest answer. You have proven me right. Have a good weekend.

  18. Rob N. Hood May 28, 2011 at 6:45 am #

    At this point, if I still cared, which I do not, I don’t even remember what silly question you wanted answered. Hope you enjoy your weekend at your cabin on the lake and all the other benefits you have garnered from this evil and Liberal country you feel so bad about. Poor old Paul…

  19. Rob N. Hood May 28, 2011 at 5:38 pm #

    Little by little, laws were passed that made saving money uneconomical and borrowing money “profitable” due to tax advantages. Little by little the financial corporations inserted themselves into corporate governance. Every level of business runs on borrowed money; and if you don’t need to borrow money the tax code will steal away your profits. If you don’t want that to happen, you have to pay tribute to the financial system.

    And a generation of MBAs grew up believing that this is how it’s supposed to be. And the corporate mainstream media indoctrinated 1/3 of Americans 100%.

    It’s like a man with a tapeworm, no matter how much he eats he loses weight. Or he might just be a greedy bastard.

  20. paul wenum May 28, 2011 at 9:40 pm #

    Typical. Change the subject. Extreme left wing teaching from a Soros class. Answer the very simple question raised. I know you can, you just don’t wish to share your true thoughts, correct? Your instructor tell you not to? I post what I feel not what any person or entity tells me to post. And you? Answer the question. If not, you have no credibilty and are nothing but a plant as your posts consistently show. Never changes.

  21. Rob N. Hood May 29, 2011 at 8:30 am #

    You know all, oh wise sage…. Why don’t you just tell me what I should say? You seem to know. You are right about one thing- you never change.

  22. paul wenum May 29, 2011 at 9:08 pm #

    Simple question, simple answer is all we ask.

  23. Rob N. Hood May 30, 2011 at 8:10 am #

    But many things in this world are not so simple as some simple-minded people like to pretend. It may make you feel better, even superior, to continue such pretense, but alas it benefits no one.

  24. paul wenum May 30, 2011 at 11:15 pm #

    No, it informs the person asking the question that you seem to avoid. A direct question should always be addressed. If not, you usually gets you in trouble trying to recant what you said in the past.

  25. Rob N. Hood May 31, 2011 at 5:46 pm #

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz… yawn… zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  26. paul wenum May 31, 2011 at 8:54 pm #

    You sleep too much. Better use of your time is thinking about a positive response to questions raised for which you have yet to address.

  27. Rob N. Hood June 1, 2011 at 5:43 pm #


  28. paul wenum June 1, 2011 at 7:03 pm #

    Nice word from a man of “Logic and reasoning. ” Typical.

  29. Rob N. Hood June 2, 2011 at 10:18 am #


  30. paul wenum June 2, 2011 at 9:27 pm #

    I notice that you like that letter. Nice letter. Should use more often I assume.

  31. Rob N. Hood July 30, 2011 at 10:45 am #


  32. Joe August 4, 2011 at 10:50 pm #

    Nice letter. You must like Rap?

  33. Rob N. Hood August 7, 2011 at 7:42 am #

    wtf? zzzzzz

  34. Joe August 27, 2011 at 10:27 pm #

    In reviewing all the posts above it seems this Rob guy cannot answer a simple queastion raised. Does he have a problem with answering a very simple question? Seems so. Have doubts about who tells him what to say, or not? Am I wrong in my assumption as well as others?

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.