Gore: ‘If The Crib’s On Fire, You Don’t Speculate That The Baby Is Flame-Retardant’
Gore: ‘If The Crib’s On Fire, You Don’t Speculate That The Baby Is Flame-Retardant’
At the House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing today, leading climate skeptic Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) tried to cast doubt on the science behind global warming, claiming “even the mainstream media are now noticing that global warming science is uneven and evolving.”
Vice President Al Gore rebuffed Barton’s attempts to interrupt his testimony and quickly debunked the claim that the recent warming trend is ordinary. Gore noted, “20 of the 21 hottest years ever measured in the human record have been in the last 25 years. The 10 hottest have been since 1990. The hottest was 2005. The hottest in the United States of America was 2006. The hottest winter ever measured globally was December of last year.”
Mocking global warming deniers, Gore said, “The planet has a fever. If your baby has a fever, you go to the doctor. If the doctor says you need to intervene here, you don’t say, well I read a science fiction novel that tells me it’s not a problem. If the crib’s on fire, you don’t speculate that the baby is flame-retardant. You take action. The planet has a fever.” Watch the highlights:
Watch Gore’s opening statement, courtesy of PoliticsTV, at Gore’s blog.
Transcript:
BARTON: The first thing I want to address is the science of global warming as portrayed in the Vice President’s film An Inconvenient Truth. This is something I believe we absolutely have to get right. Even the main stream media, Mr. Vice President, are now noticing that global warming science is uneven and evolving. we need to be deliberative and careful when we talk about so-called facts.
[…]
BARTON: But it remains a fact, and it’s clear from the data that we do have, that for hundreds of thousands of years, CO2 levels have followed temperature rise, not the other way around, as you preach.
[…]
GORE: That’s exactly what the models predict. That’s exactly what the science says –
BARTON: Mr. Vice President, my time is up. What’s your answer on the CAFE increase?
GORE: If I could complete my response, congressman.
BARTON: I hope that there’s an answer in there somewhere.
GORE: May I?
BARTON: I’d like to have an answer to the straight question.
GORE: Well you asked quite a few of them. And I’m doing my best. On CO2 and temperature, when CO2 goes up, temperature goes up. That is why 20 of the 21 hottest years ever measured in the human record have been in the last 25 years.
The 10 hottest have been since 1990.
The hottest was 2005.
The hottest in the United States of America was 2006.
The hottest winter ever measured globally was December of last year, and January and February of this year — last month. This is going on right now.
The planet has a fever. If your baby has a fever, you go to the doctor. If the doctor says you need to intervene here, you don’t say, well I read a science fiction novel that tells me it’s not a problem. If the crib’s on fire, you don’t speculate that the baby is flame-retardant. You take action. The planet has a fever.
[…]
BARTON: The temperature goes up before CO2 goes up.
GORE: Sometimes, that has been true in the past. The opposite has also been true in the past. But what is happening now is that we, because of human action, are overwhelming all of those cycles.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
that’s key that he’s putting in it the simplest possible terms - a lot of people need a LOT of help understanding complex issues involving science.
besides, they always gobble up Righty’s ultra-simplistic formulations….
March 21st, 2007 at 12:40 pmThe Goracle has spoken!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:40 pmAl Gore will kill us before the CO2
March 21st, 2007 at 12:41 pmHeh
Flaco sez:
You were waiting all day to type that, weren’t you?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:43 pmThis bot is such a fool. Back to your energy guzzling Tennessee mansion bot!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:43 pmIf one believes in an afterlife, Rep. barton will roast in hell.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:44 pmThat’s right Flaco, and you read it anyway. The words were spoken in your mind. You have absorbed the words.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:45 pmThe planet has a fever. If your baby has a fever, you go to the doctor. If the doctor says you need to intervene here, you don’t say, well I read a science fiction novel that tells me it’s not a problem. If the crib’s on fire, you don’t speculate that the baby is flame-retardant. You take action. The planet has a fever.
This is a brilliant analogy - alluding to familiar family care and values while simultaneously blasting the anti-science crowd.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:45 pmYo, Flako, what, no Anna Nicole news on Fox?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:46 pmMembers of the House should be very careful when challenging members or ex-members of the Senate. Same advice would hold for a middleweight squaring off against a heavyweight.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:47 pmeveryone soak in the Gore-y goodness!!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:48 pmI’ve got a fever for global warming!!
hooray for Galdalph!!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:49 pmSurely a much more cost effective way to save the planet would be to mock Al Gore sufficiently to ensure that he is wrong.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:49 pmFree the CO2!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:50 pmFree the CO2!
Free the CO2!
Free the CO2!
Free the CO2!
Free the CO2!
Free the CO2!
flako and patrickarmyof1: Are you guys roomies?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:50 pm“Water World” is just around the corner. I believe Gore not the repukes. Let us not forget that it was the Bush administration who put political hacks in positions of power where they could intercept climate change data reports and alter them. This is a fact, so if climate change isn’t real why rty and change data??
March 21st, 2007 at 12:50 pmWHY do you G.O.P.ers need a summary of MY
March 21st, 2007 at 12:51 pmstatements? If you’d just paid the price of
a ticket to watch my moviue, your questions
should have been answered! I’m a Democrat
born and bred and I will brook NO disparaging
remarks about my theories. Remember, I
invented the INTERNET and Tipper and I were
the models for LOVE STORY! Why do you
blitherers keep pestering me with your
vapid remarks!? Go home and let the
people who KNOW HOW TO RUN THINGS AROUND
HERE run them! — Sincerely Al.
smafdy: agreed, except barton is a flyweight, at best
March 21st, 2007 at 12:51 pmThere are other reasons we need to transition to other forms of energy.
We are locked into our current supplier for oil because that is what our refineries are configured to process. And what they process mostly is “light” oil and that supply is limited. Refineries will require heavy upgrades to process the more plentiful “heavy” oil and that will cause a very sharp increase in prices when that change is imposed by bad energy policy. We really need to preserve the supply of light crude for critical needs and Hummers are not a critical need.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:52 pmThis will be a crucial issue in the 08 elections.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:52 pmUnfortunately, the BushBSCabal is too preoccupied lying about all the scams they have perpetrated so far to pay attention to the fire in the crib.
Globaloney and Globalarmism
March 21st, 2007 at 12:52 pmTrolls are spinning. Bunch of luddites and flat-earthers.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:53 pm14 - they’re “more” than roomies. they’re in the same “family”
March 21st, 2007 at 12:54 pmBarton acted like a flaming jackass during his approportioned time by reading something obviously written by someone else who appointed him as the “administration hitman”. It backfired totally in his face however when he read the word “we” and quickly inserted “I” as he outed his source immediately. This man Barton needs to receive reprisals from his elected state because he was clearly “out of synch” with the bipartisan willingness of this committee to view this issue as a “moral issue” rather than a “political issue”. Barton looked like a fool reading his statement and being shot down by Gore. He began to interrupt (out of order) when he lost it and then scurried out of the hearing room, like a total jackass, laughing under his breath.
BARTON EPITOMIZES EVERYTHING THAT IS WRONG WITH THIS GOVERNMENT OF OURS! HE’S A SYCOPHANTIC ‘YES MAN’ WHO NEEDS TO BE THROWN OUT OF OFFICE BECAUSE HE’S NOTHING MORE THAN A SPINMEISTER AND A MISINFORMED IDIOT, PRETENDING TO KNOW WHAT HE’S TALKING ABOUT.
On the opposite side, I was heartened to see that the overwhelming majority of bipartisan support is that we take this situation seriously and that the science is no longer “in question” as our corporate-owned fascist government would have us believe. That talking point of theirs has been totally put to it’s grave now.
Also, Al Gore looked every bit the philospher and, as one member of this committee referred to him as a “prophet”….Al Gore is the Prophet of our Time; should be sitting in the White House right now and we would not find this country descending like the Titanic today. He was corruptly robbed of his position and I believe the new dialogue today will be to join the ranks of the already burgeoning numbers who are attempting to draft “Al Gore for President”. After all, it’s the only way to correct the wrong which was done for the man who won the both the popular vote AND the electoral college vote.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:55 pmI wonder where Flako and Jakeoff got their scientific degrees?? What unintelligent, misinformed trolls we have on these threads. Thank goodness that anyone with average intelligence can see right through their spin, drivel and total detritus. Hah!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:56 pmGetting a bit unhinged, Flako?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pmAl Gore for President in ‘08! Sign up with the thousands who are doing so today!!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pmIf this is such a crisis then why is their star witness ManBearPig?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pmYou mean the earth isn’t flat?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:59 pmThe Science says there is no such thing as ‘Global Warming’.
The Science says there is a thing called CLIMATE CHANGE.
Global Warming = Man did it.
Climate Change = a natural occurrence caused mainly by…. THE SUN!
The difference between the two is - one will tax you for breathing.
Before I get dog-piled for having an unpopular opinion…
I agree that Humanity has an effect on the ecology. I just think We have little to do with Climate Change.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:00 pmthis is going to be fun - i knew any Gore thread to come along would prompt a fit of Righty hysterics that will last all day long - i’m betting on 500+ posts for this one, where we get to hear about how the earth is actually flat and the moon was made by the lord out of actual green cheese and so on
Righty science knowledge on parade is a mighty thing to see - more creative than Greenwich Village’s Pride Parade, so bring it, flake-o’s, and fireants, and whoever else the Brigade is able to spare from other fronts - bring your laughable maelstrom, in all its radiant splendor!!
March 21st, 2007 at 1:00 pmAh, but the science is *still* in question veritas. A new study by the JPL shows clear links between sun activity and climate change.
The biggest issue for me with climate change is the anthropogenic aspect, something that the IPCC doesn’t adequately address.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:00 pmOily guy:
According to opensecrets.org, a watchdog group that monitors monetary contributions to politicians, Barton alone has received close to $2 million in campaign contributions from energy companies and their political action committees since he has been in office. The oil and gas industry has been the top industry contributor to his campaign. This does not include contributions from individuals who work for petrochemical companies, though. Last year, employees from Anadarko Petroleum alone contributed $50,000.
And it’s also fun to note:
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Barton was one of only 11 House members to vote against the Hurricane Katrina Emergency Relief bill passed by Congress and signed by President Bush on September 8, 2005.
So it’s not really fair to characterize him as being solely anti-environmental, he’s a multi-faceted loser.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:02 pmI wonder where Flako and Jakeoff got their scientific degrees??
Same place Gore got his.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:03 pm#16,
March 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pmHi, you’re wrong.
#14 No. They are butt buddies. But uncloseted like so many other members of the Republic Party hierarchy.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pmFlaco got his quote from http://demolition65.wordpress.com/
March 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pmRemember, I invented the INTERNET and Tipper and I were
the models for LOVE STORY!
Comment by Patrick1
Wow. If after all this time you still believe he said those things then you are farther gone than I thought.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:05 pmFunny how those without degrees or accreditations in anything other than bedwetting attempt to downplay this issue. Deny deny deny. And when that doesn’t work, become a monkey and start flinging dung all over the place to see if some of it might stick.
My god, this is an issue that threatens the existence of the human race and instead of approaching it with an open mind and intellectual patience, it instead becomes a political hot potato with a debate that has all the mindless blather of a bad Hollywood Squares show.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:06 pmThe Repubs basically took all their allotted time grandstanding and not asking him any questions. Nice tactic.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:06 pmEaster is fast approaching, first day of spring - so where’s Roger Rabbit? This is a climate/energy thread so I’d expect an appearance.
Anyhow let’s contrast Al Gore’s sage performance with a classic from the Roger Rabbit school of oil pricing:
“Most are also getting out of oil right now as it looks to be heading back down to around $40 a barrel and around $1.15 per gallon of gas by spring” - Roger Rabbit, 22 September, 2006.
DallasNE - maybe treating Hugo Chavez more carefully and not cheering on coups against him might see him be more amenable to selling his heavy crude to Uncle Sam? Good post.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:08 pmWhat The Hell . . .
March 21st, 2007 at 1:09 pmCompare the CO2 output from a single Volcanic eruption with a decade of Human CO2 emission. Do the math.
More math - Global Warming will TAX YOU FOR BREATHING.
stop with the left v right bull, long enough to look objectively at the real evidence.
It’s a scam for Global Taxes.
Why not focus on something real - like fresh water shortages, Land over-development, dumping of hazardous chemical, biological and nuclear waste. Lets tax Corporations heavily for the messes they make.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:10 pmSweet. Gore left-hooked Michael Chricton with that “well I read a science fiction novel that tells me it’s not a problem.”
Excellent.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:11 pmAl Gore for President in ‘08!
Sure I’ll vote for the loser of two elections.
Ya kinda fell sorry this Gore dude.
He reminds me of the kid always talking about whatever but not quite all there … Ya know what I mean.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:12 pmI don’t think it was right of him to make fun of retarded babies…
March 21st, 2007 at 1:12 pmAll through history, conservatives have been the retards of society. The fact that conservatives don’t believe in global warming is to be expected and means nothing.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:12 pmCarbon Credits for the poor…anyone?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:14 pmWhy do the Repuke trolls hate our planet?
They not only hate our Constitution and our legal system, but they hate the entire planet.
Maybe they are all Rapture Repukes who want WW3 to happen so they can all go to JEEEEZUS.
What a bunch of psychos.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:14 pmUM - yeah, whatever you say, Al.
If liberals were really interested in swaying public opinion over warming, they’d replace Gore with a more sane, less divsive and crazy spokesperson.
At least we know why Tipper cares about mental health.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:15 pmMath done. Volcanic is CO2 output is serious, but eruptions are sporatic and the earth has time to “heal” inbetween eruptions. Human emissions never, ever, cease.
Besides, something I always bring up, WHO WANTS SMOG ANYWAY? Forget global warming, carbon emissions smell bad, cause haze, and are bad for your health. That’s reason enough to limit it!
Why not do that AND lower carbon emissions?
I can multitask…
March 21st, 2007 at 1:15 pmSmack: Actually the explosion of Krakatoa in 1883 caused global temperatures to DROP by 1.2 celsius worldwide. So, your premise is in doubt.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:16 pmBig business, especially the Insurance industry, is on Gore’s side now.
Except for most of Big Oil, although the Chevron CEO recently admitted that global warming is for real and we need to do something about it.
The insurance industry studies risk and they know global warming is real and a big risk. They don’t want to lose their shirts, so they are on board.
And other businesses are figuring out that going green can make them a LOT of green. New products and new markets means big profits.
You Repuke trolls are behind the curve here, you’re still denying global warming. Global warming is real, and big business agrees now.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:17 pmIf conservatives wanted the public to believe ANYTHING they say anymore, they would have replaced W with a more sane, less divisive and crazy spokesperson.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:17 pmI was wondering where all the trolls had gone to from the other threads!
March 21st, 2007 at 1:18 pmLooks like you losers are in full retreat; into a fetal position curled up in a corner.
When the wheels of justice begin to grind into the pitiful few grains of substance that comprise your withering yield, you rite-wing wacktoids are forced into a realm where the laws of nature have deemed you unfit for survival.
” The wise man built his house upon a rock,
the foolish man built his house upon the sand.
And the rains came tumbling down…” (Old Sunday school song)
[you’re welcome, Daryll]
can someone explain this to me? what if the global warming people are wrong. what if. and we still take steps to reduce C02. in 50 years, 25 years…whatever…we all look back and say “wow. the global warming people were wrong. but we still did this good thing”. wouldn’t THAT be better than looking back and saying “shit…the global warming people were right and we did nothing”. where — even IF ALL THE SCIENCE IS WRONG — where is the harm in trying to reduce C02s?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:19 pmWhy are babies smoking in crib?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:19 pmLHT, meet your bunk buddies, Flako and Patrickarmyof1. Do you guys like threesomes?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:20 pm50
Besides, something I always bring up, WHO WANTS SMOG ANYWAY? Forget global warming, carbon emissions smell bad, cause haze, and are bad for your health. That’s reason enough to limit it!
Hey a sensible moonbat. I think I have discovered a new species!
I have been banned ar KOS today.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:21 pmMy badge of honor, Yea!!!
Smack - some links please on the CO2 and please present your evidence about the scam you have unearthed. Liked your last paragraph though - I note with dismay the Bush admin running down very successful green projects like Superfund.
Dale that JPL study links sunspot activity to climate yes, but the IPCC indicates that even with that the sun activity is acting in opposition to current warming trend and the sun activity has less effect than the more pronounced CO2 forcer… I would type more but this is a treo.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:22 pmUM - yeah, whatever you say, Al.
If liberals were really interested in swaying public opinion over warming, they’d replace Gore with a more sane, less divsive and crazy spokesperson.
At least we know why Tipper cares about mental health.
Comment by Liberals Heart Terrorists — March 21, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
We aren’t FASCISTS like you are, Gore is a *private-citizen*, lobbying on his own behalf. We don’t ‘replace’ private citizens, you nazi piece of sh*t - that’s what you sh*theads try to do!
Just to clarify, CRAZY people like YOU are why Tipper cares about mental health.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:23 pm#44
He reminds me of the kid always talking about whatever but not quite all there … Ya know what I mean.
More projection from Flaco.
Hey trolls, how come this administration needed to “mold” scientific information in such a way to cast doubt on global warming and its effects if it is not actually a problem?
You know, kind of like how they used debunked intelligence to get us into a war over oil? Which, by the way, when you burn it, releases a ton load of that notorious greenhouse gas everyone seems to be fretting over…
I dare you to actually answer my questions instead of providing your usual dodge and smear tactics.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:23 pmAnother quote from Gore’s “testimony”, was that you don’t read a sci-fi novel if the doctor says your baby has a fever. Gore tries to use metaphor instead of science fact, and worse, often falls back on pure “belief” (religion) against fact, to continue supporting global warming, so real analysis found in a sci-fi novel trumps religion any day of the week.
A deeper question is, why are we suddenly talking about global warming, Valerie Plame / Scooter Libby and the legitimate firing of US attorneys?
ANSWER: Dems have utterly retreated in their attempts to pullout of Iraq, and now want to chance the subject. They don’t want to be seen as retreating from retreating, so we will now get a bunch of these fluff pieces.
I seriously hope the Dems have more than these handfuls of issues prior to the 2008 election, because they failed to form a cohesive Iraq strategy that the Democratically controlled Senate could support, and now show up empty handed on election day.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:24 pmWho do you think is going to benefit from these new Taxes?
The Science of Global Warming is warped to fit the agenda - i.e. a Carbon Tax.
Climate Change is real. Humans contribute to damaging the ecosystem.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:25 pmThe contribution to climate change is negligible. Do your own research. While you’re at it, look at the ‘GLOBAL COOLING’ scare of a couple decades ago. It is stunning what people can be fooled into believing.
If global warming is real, and it is caused by man’s dependence on fossil fuels, why are our other planetary neighbors, who we can assume are free of man’s polluting effects, also experiencing global warming?
FACT: Global warming is not just happening on Earth.
What could possibly be the common denominator, oh wise Goracolytes?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:26 pmGore is a stud, period. I appreciate the fact that he cuts through this political crap and demands action. He realizes that the time for these pointless hearings are gone. I hope the Dems take a que from him and move away from the neverending debate and start implementing plans to fix Global warming. Every day they wait, is one more lost day. The only thing that upsets me about the Dems at this point regarding Global warming is their inability to take action. They are still treating this as a political issue and are only using it for political gain. Do they not realize that the big political payoff is finding and implementing a solution? The American public are firm believers in Global warming. The boost they would get for actually passing some bills and implementing some change to combat this problem are huge. I find global warming to be the absolute largest problem facing mankind. In my book, the party that implements the changes needed is a party we should all support. I am on record as saying I am a big Gore supporter and would have no problem voting for him for President. While I disagree on alot of the little nothing issues, I do agree on the largest of issues with him. If he could make the changes needed, I would accept some of the others baggage that comes with it. The Dems as a whole are the same. I have wrote every single one of my congressmen demanding they stop doing nothing. What will it take to light a fire under their butts and get them moving?
It was a nice relief for awhile seeing the Dems promote this issue and campaign on it. Personally, it was one of the things I looked forward to when they took power. At this point, they either don’t realize how big an issue this is or they are don’t care. How can they waste time on all these pointless trivial issues when we have a problem that very well may destroy the world? Is it prudent to set up show trials looking to score poltical points based on the justice department while the world is quickly dying? I fail to understand how they don’t see the huge political gain for them once they take action. Don’t get me wrong, I support any efforts or attempts on their part, no matter how little, to combat this problem. I just wish they would be doing much more in a much faster fashion.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:27 pm#55… Tony…..
March 21st, 2007 at 1:27 pmExactly. There is nothing wrong with the mindset of being aware that changes can happen, and looking for cause and effect.
The shrill voices who automatically disclaim climate change, or the fact that humans can alter climate; are the fearful and the uneducated who sense how fragile and tenuous their existences are.
Smack makes a great point. Also, I don’t think anyone can honestly say we are in a “planetary emergency.” Warming period, maybe, not emergency. Since we only have 130 years of temperatures on record and the earth is 4 billion years old, I would argue we have survived warming periods before.
I agree with the Czech President - environmentalism is the new communism. There will be a class of elites who suck the earth dry of “her” resources while the rest of us starve or freeze to death.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:28 pmWhat qualifies ManBearPig to speak on this topic?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:30 pmAnd to detractors…. I’m not willing to invest time in a full fledged debate here. I’m expressing an opinion. Do your own research. Try looking at both sides for a change.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:30 pm#60 - Why are you so angry and hateful? I think you’re the Nazi - I am sure you’re thinking of a way to exterminate conservatives right now. You’re daydreaming about it.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:30 pmNow the Repukes are calling Gore insane and divisive.
Sounds like projection to me. They are projecting Chimpy’s insanity and divisiveness onto Gore.
Typical Repuke spin tactic.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:31 pmSmack,
The ceaseless abuse of the Earth’s natural resources results in negligable damage done to the ecosystems by humans? Huh?
Do you know that the Earth’s climate is a part of the ecosystem? Get your head out of the sand man, when the sea levels rise you’ll be drowning.
BTW, since you’re so confident in your assertion that humans, who have dominated and sought control over basically everything on Earth, contribute a neglible amount of damage to the planet, please cite your sources. Negative points for citing big Oil front groups.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:31 pmFear-mongering at its finest.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:31 pm“a class of elites who suck the earth dry of “her†resources”
They’re called Americans. WE are the ones doing this…right now.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:32 pmenvironmentalism is the new communism. There will be a class of elites who suck the earth dry of “her†resources while the rest of us starve or freeze to death.
Comment by Liberals Heart Terrorists
You think that environmentalists want to use up the earth’s resources in a harmful way? I think you need to refer to a dictionary before you continue with this line of thought.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:32 pmSweet. I thought that argument was dead when it was debunked for the billionth time. Last week I heard somebody at work bring it up, then this today.
Notice that the cause and solution for the (faulty) “global cooling” science is exactly the same as global warming. The difference is merely how the CO2 affects the planet — As a blanket to trap warmth, or as a shield to block warmth.
But nothing sounds better to science-deniers than to point out that 50 years ago we had something wrong and, in fact, the end result is the exact opposite of what we are seeing. Therefore, in their strange twisted logic, all climate science must forever be wrong!
March 21st, 2007 at 1:33 pmWe should put all the Repuke trolls in here out on an ice floe.
See if they can swim as good as the polar bears who are drowning.
What’s 100 Repukes at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean?
A good start.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:33 pm#55, #66, others. There’s nothing wrong with cutting CO2 emissions, but I don’t want to see it done at the expense of harming our GDP. I’m all for increasing nuclear, wind and solar power; reducing our dependence on oil. But I want to see it done without harming our industrial infrastructure; trying to cut back CO2 emissions by 50% can only be accomplished by strangling our economy.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:34 pmSmack - ozone hole - natural or human caused? Why then is it so hard for you to accept the anthroprogenic causes of climate change? Global cooling - right yeah - climate science and understanding of the IceAges were in their infancy. The understanding was poor, I agree as Bush says “can’t get fooled again”. I’ve done my research - its about the science not about belief. Yes it is stunning what people believe - Saddam did 9-11, had WMD 45mins from use, ‘reconstituted nuclear weapons’, Bush is a great leader, almost as great as St Ronnie.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:35 pmThese Repukes denying Global Warming are the same bunch of whackos who deny Evolution and want to teach our kids Cretinism in public schools.
They’re anti-science Luddites who don’t care if our planet dies. Just as long as they can drive their big fat gas hogs around.
My ex used to say, “The bigger the truck, the smaller the penis”.
These Repukes all drive huge trucks.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:37 pmThere’s no need to listen to, debate or exchange with these Repubs anymore, as far as I’m concerned. I’m not interested in trying to convince them we’re right or to change thier way of thinking. I just want them to stay out of my way and not bother to talk to me unless I ask them some question I have in mind. Repubs are not worth the time or exasperation, because they’re all a bunch of liars and backstabbing thieves. That’s it. As for myself? I’m going to move forward and do what I know is the right thing to do. Good work, Al Gore, and let all good people work toward a better and greener planet.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:37 pmDale, go do your homework. We can cut emissions AND not hurt the economy. In fact, it can help the economy with new businesses making new green products.
That “hurting the economy” talking point is just another Repuke lie.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:38 pmTom3 - from T3
http://www.apolloalliance.org
March 21st, 2007 at 1:42 pmWho wants to hurt the GDP? We’re talking about CREATING jobs and creating companies whose home offices are IN THIS COUNTRY. People are buying into the FUD that the oil companies are spewing to save their bottom line. Frankly, I don’t care if the oil companies start losing profits. Most of those profits do not help the USA GDP. Meanwhile, “Joe USA Hydrogen” will be making money hand over fist supplying the fuel needed for “hydrogen fuel cell” cars, just as an example.
If it wasn’t for the oil lobby, we would have abandoned gasoline decades ago because it is just not an efficient fuel. But we keep subsidizing them over this irrational fear that the economy will grind to a halt if we replace them. Meanwhile, they jack up prices on a whim, which puts the REAL strain on our national GDP as more and more money flows out while less flows in…
March 21st, 2007 at 1:42 pmCite this and that… whatever…
No logical argument is possible. Any disagreement is immediately savaged. If you can’t separate the politics and media hype from the science, what is the point?
Can we agree that there is validity on both sides of the scientific debate?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:43 pmIf not, I have nothing left to add.
My first job out of graduate school was as a wildlife biologist with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. My supervisor there told me a story once that, although it was 31 years ago, is directly related to the analogies that President Gore used today. The story goes……
If you have a toothache, you go to the dentist. The dentist says you need a root canal. Because of the dentists training and experience you let him/her drill open the tooth, pull out the nerve, kill the tooth, and then refill the hole.
If you have a pain in your side you go to the doctor who says your appendix is about to burst and you need emergency surgery. Because of that person’s training and experience you let him/her knock you out, open your body, cut out a portion of it and then sew your body back up.
Yet when it comes to wildlife biology, everyone from the local bank president to the janitor at the high school is an expert, and we who do that work for our career dont know a thing about which we speak.
That very same analogy can be applied to the hundreds of global warming/climate change scientists out there around the world. Just recently a United Nations group came out with a report summarizing and analyzing something like 900 papers on global warming and climate change. To a person they agreed with the study designs, the papers results and the papers conclusions. 900 some papers.
Yet despite that example and hundreds if not thousands more like it, those afraid of the truth like Congressman Joe Barton (R) or professional gasbag Rush Limbaugh (R) or Senator James Inhofe (R) or author Michael Crichton (R) are all authorities and the people from whom Al Gore gets his data and with whom Al Gore has visited Antarctica and other places around the world to get the facts and then be able to put them in laymans terms, are reactionaries who the nitwit Republic Party reps here claim are molding the debate for a climate tax.
Just how stupid do you Republic Party idiots think the world is? Do you think we sit around getting our talking points from Rush so we know what drivel to spew that day? We the people became fed up with that mentality last November and bounced your party from the majority in both houses of Congress. The people know whats going on. Why do you deny reality?
I encourage each and everyone of the naysayers to tell your children and your grandchildren that there is no global warming and that its all hype so that 50 years from now when the effects of global warming that you refused to accept is in full force, they can look back and say “my grandpa Patrick was such a dumb bastard. I wish his generation had done something when there was still time.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:43 pmI see the righties have their knickers into a twist over Gore’s testimony. Ha! Ha! Hopefully, they’ll choke on their bile and help the planet by ceasing to emit CO2 through their respiratory system.
Those righties are so crassly ignorant and abysmally stupid that they keep on ignoring the opinions of a worldwide majority of scientists and believing in whatever tripe the other crassly ignorant and abysmally stupid propagandists of Faux News serves them for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:45 pm…I don’t think anyone can honestly say we are in a “planetary emergency.â€
Burning of fossils fuels has allowed for the Earth’s population to explode, leading to a larger need of fossil fuels, a larger need for food, water, and all other essential resources. We aren’t in a planetary emergency? Diseases like malaria, something we in the U.S. had to worry little about, are creeping north towards the Southern U.S., why? Well, I guess it’s the “warming period” we are going through that allows the malaria carrying mosquitos to thrive in places they couldn’t before. Other diseases like avian flu, TB (which is making a huge comeback worldwide), AIDS, etc. are all tied into the population explosion brought on by our use of fossil fuels to do everything bigger, faster, stronger. Heck, even the microbes we once held in check with antibiotics are getting stronger.
Global Warming is one aspect of the damage we as a species have wrought on the environment. Is it the end all and be all of environmental problems? Not by a long shot! But by claiming that all the changes we have seen with our own eyes are natural is a profound display of stupidity! Take a look at how the length of time between these “natural” cycles has absolutely telescoped since the Industrial Revolution and then assert that the damage man has done is negligible? Huh?
To deny a need to start addressing problems that may not qualify to you as a “crisis” is a supremely short-sighted and selfish approach. I hope you don’t have children, because basically, you’d rather pass the buck to them than acknowledge that changes made now, before the planet shows ABSOLUTE signs of flatlining (which, in alot of ways it already is) is basically flipping the bird to future generations.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:46 pm#77…. Dale…
March 21st, 2007 at 1:47 pmThe industry, and thus the ecomomy, which would arise from a focused and broad based initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and simply putting into place existing technologies for alternative energy, could be a renaissance for the United States.
G. Dubious’ “Not one American job lost” mantra is as false as the rest of him.
What he, and his owners, don’t want to lose, is the easy money they make by plundering the United States and the rest of the world of it’s natural resources.
FDR had a gift of explaining things in his fireside chats in just such a way–using metaphors that people could relate to instantly. It wasn’t dumming anything down, it was being powerful and clear. It’s a gift that’s disappeared from our political discourse for the most part–seeing Gore use it was a thrill.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:47 pmThe problem, Smack, is that there is no scientific debate, except for things such as “rate of change” and what-not. The political debate is really the only debate. And the debate is “can we trust our scientists.” That’s the debate. Stalin would be proud.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:48 pmI wonder where Flako and Jakeoff got their scientific degrees??
Comment by veritas — March 21, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
They don’t even believe in evolution how can you expect them to believe in global warming. The probably think its gods plan to speed up the rapture.
On the other hand intelligent people tend to err on the side of caution. But “money in my pocket” is the real god these repukes pray to.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:49 pm#80, Al Gore is calling for an immediate freeze, then sharp reductions, in our CO2 emissions. Cutting emissions could be done by closing power plants, driving less, getting more fuel efficient cars. But all of those options would require us SPENDING money; can you tell me how we’d do that without harming our GDP?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:49 pm#55, #66, others. There’s nothing wrong with cutting CO2 emissions, but I don’t want to see it done at the expense of harming our GDP. I’m all for increasing nuclear, wind and solar power; reducing our dependence on oil. But I want to see it done without harming our industrial infrastructure; trying to cut back CO2 emissions by 50% can only be accomplished by strangling our economy. Comment by Dale — March 21, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
So you prefer to have a little more convenient life today, so your grandkids can all die of planetary disaster? Wow, that’s what I call *sacrifice* Dale. Have you always been this selfish and self absorbed? Oh wait, you’re a CON, of course you have.
Also your *false-premise* that cutting CO2 will harm the economy ist just st*pid - just like yourself.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:49 pm#80, Al Gore is calling for an immediate freeze, then sharp reductions, in our CO2 emissions. Cutting emissions could be done by closing power plants, driving less, getting more fuel efficient cars. But all of those options would require us SPENDING money; can you tell me how we’d do that without harming our GDP? Comment by Dale — March 21, 2007 @ 1:49 pm
Spending money is what *drives* the GDP, dum bass!
March 21st, 2007 at 1:52 pmcome on righties! you can do better than this!!
March 21st, 2007 at 1:53 pm#80, #82, #86, others; you’re all talking about these great new industries and great new jobs that’ll arise from us switching to hydrogen power, or a “focused and broad based initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions” or “new businesses making new green products”.
But where are these jobs, and initiatives, and products coming from? Remember, TANSTAAFL. We can’t just create this stuff out of thin air. Creating an entire industry from scratch is going to take money. LOTS of money. And if we were to freeze CO2 emissions now, then where is the money/energy coming from to CREATE this industry (factories, transportation systems, etc).
March 21st, 2007 at 1:53 pmVVGFU… still on that playground kick, huh?
Let’s talk about this later when you’re ready to act a bit more mature.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:54 pmI think the trolls are going to burst into flame soon.
Anyone have a thimble-full of water?
March 21st, 2007 at 1:57 pmThe conservative argument for everything comes down to money. Shallow greedy little f-cks they are. Screw the GDP and the GOP.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:59 pmSmack: Actually the explosion of Krakatoa in 1883 caused global temperatures to DROP by 1.2 celsius worldwide. So, your premise is in doubt.
Comment by helenahandbasket — March 21, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
Careful before neocons realize we could cool temperatures by dropping bombs and creating a nuclear winter. We’d be gone but the earth would be cooler.
We could also rapidly increase pollution and cause enough smog to block out the sun of course that would only work until we all died from asthma and lung cancer and couldn’t create more pollution.
Either way the earth will survive its civilization that won’t.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:00 pmParrotlover77 –
so your answer to my question is no.
Are you Sure?
Will you invest an hour of your time to even listen to another point of view?
March 21st, 2007 at 2:01 pmDale click the link and stop whining.
http://www.apolloalliance.org
Repeat after me:
Manhattan Project
Apollo Project
Good grief. New trolls please - these are all broken - broken records that is.
Or have you ‘cut and run’ from climate change already…?
March 21st, 2007 at 2:01 pm#83
No logical argument is possible.
You hit the nail on the head here Smack. People cannot engage in a logical discussion with someone who doesn’t bring logic to the table - whic is why it is so hard to get these points across to you.
What is your argument here again? That we should just let it runs its course, because heck, the planet won’t explode - at least not while I’m alive? Cite this, cite that, yea, is it too much to ask (or too logical to assume) that you would have facts on your side? How is this a political issue for you???
FACT: Carbon is a greenhouse gas.
FACT: Human’s have harnessed vast reserves of energy, in the form of oil, that when burned, release carbon into the atmosphere.
FACT: Global warming exists.
How do you suppose this should be handled?
March 21st, 2007 at 2:05 pm#96 Mistress Z ~
March 21st, 2007 at 2:05 pmawww, I was gonna piss on em..
ONE WORD………..GAIA.
In West Palm Beach Florida where I have lived for the last four years since approximately when Hurricane Wilma went through in 2005 we have had CONSTANT
March 21st, 2007 at 2:06 pm… my link didn’t show up for some reason
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU
The Great Global Warming Swindle. Check it out. If you can’t be bothered to listen to the other side of this SCIENCE issue, then we have nothing to discuss.
I am not a Neo-Con. So please don’t label me one just because I don’t agree with you on this ONE issue. It only serves to discredit you.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:08 pmWow. Patrick1 even dragged up the whole “Al invented Internet” thing. The only people who believed he said that are people with a frankly poor comprehension of english.
But rather than derail the thread, I’ll just point you to a statement on that very subject by Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn.
…you do know who they were, right?
As for this whole global warming thing, why is it so bad to focus on being energy efficient, and not using resources we kill each other over and run out of eventually anyway?
March 21st, 2007 at 2:08 pm[…] global warming deniers, Gore said, “The planet has a fever. If your baby has a fever, you go to the doctor. If the doctor says you […]
March 21st, 2007 at 2:08 pm78. Oh yeah and if a major asteroid hits the earth and causes global cooling like during the ice ages the earth we’ll be cooler, of course we’ll be gone like dinosaurs, or mammoths or saber tooth tigers but the earth will be cooler.
I know you repukes could develop a bomb to force volcanic activity thereby creating enough fallout to kill us all buy the earth will probably be cooler.
Would all trolls please retreat to your bibles and come back for a discussion you can understand.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:10 pmThat “hurting the economy†talking point is just another Repuke lie.
Comment by Tom3 — March 21, 2007 @ 1:38 pm
Yeah just like taxing that top 1% would hurt the economy. Like the economy is doing so great now.
When will repukes get that trickle down economics doesn’t work. Didn’t work under Reagan isn’t working for Bush. Clinton proved that trickle up economics works by creating jobs for the poor and giving them better wages. Repukes haven’t notice that there was no deficit when Clinton left office. They didn’t get talking points on that.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:14 pmHe’d better run for President.
Al Gore has one thing going for him that most of the candidates, on both sides of the table do not.
He actually “cares” about the country.
He actually cares about the world.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:15 pmsomeday a sociology grad student will incorporate righty-troll behavior into a doctoral research project on cult formations/behaviors, if they’re not already.
no light shines in, once the shiny wall of self-justification is in place
we should have a deprogrammer on staff to help rescue some of these poor folks.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:16 pmThis topic has shown me how absolutely shrill and hysterical the ‘left’ can behave. I’m not a Republican and if you look at some of my previous posts you’d know I despise them, but to see some of your posts… I wonder what the difference is sometimes. Some of you are just as dense and unyielding.
Some of you can’t even be bothered to consider there may be another valid point of view. Why some of you insist on twisting my view and painting me as one of your ‘trolls’ is testimony to your unreasonable fanaticism for this unproven theory.
I fail to see any benefit in discussing the subject, when my opinions will only be summarily dismissed and ridiculed.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:18 pmViews are more credible when you can back ‘em up with something.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:20 pmSmack thanks for the link - maybe this weekend I rent Inconvenient Truth and watch your link in sequence. ‘Fair and balanced’ n’est ce pas? Mean time you can Google “global warming swindle debunked” for some criticism of your link.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:26 pmIs that Worfeus?
Dude….nice to ’see’ you.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:28 pmListen up,
IMO the Dems need to stop saying this would instantly create jobs and not in anyway hurt our economy. Look, this is a huge problem and fixing it will hurt the economy. You should look on the bright side. In the USA, we will simply be “hurt” by these changes. In the long run, we will rebound and “new industry” will come up. These new jobs will happen down the road and our economy will shift and become strong down the road. In the short term, our economy will head down hill for sure. The bright side is that the USA won’t be hurt like many other countries. Place like China, India, and Russia need to change much more then even we do. These countries will absolutely get decimated by these changes.
It is a very sad fact but we did it to ourselves. We cannot sit back and let GLobal warming to continue because the changes needed TO SAVE THE WORLD will hurt many countries and people severely. It is a neccesary step that must to done. This isn’t a regional problem and it is selfish thinking about the dent to our economy when these mandatory changes will starve people to death in other countries. This is a sad reality but it must be done. Does the world have the strength to do it is the real question.
Currently, we have treated global warming with kiddie gloves. Even if the EU and the USA cut emissions by 50% which neither is proposing it won’t matter one bit if we can’t force China, Russia, and India to not only completely stop any planned emissions increases but start making reductions too. Without those three countries reducing their emissions by alot, all the EU and USA’s reductions are meaningless. Sure, out cuts will hurt our economy. When we force China and India to cut their emissions, people will probably die. So stop being shallow and stop worrying about your retirement fund taking a hit. China and India are going to get crushed by these needed changes. Sadly, we need to start these changes today so they have almost no time to prepare which will compound the difficulties we will be placing on them.
Hopefully the world can work together and provide some relief for these countries that will be effected the most by the needed mandates. When we demand China and India not only stop increasing, but also demand they reduce emissions to a point that at least makes them inline with the EU and the USA, we will need to also provide some economic aid. We need to prepare for this stuff now!
March 21st, 2007 at 2:30 pmSmack,
Gravity is a theory too. Why don’t you point out the validity of those who try to debunk that one?
March 21st, 2007 at 2:30 pmSo not only will our economy be hurt, but we’ll have to provide massive economic aid to others also? And just where are we going to get the money to pay for all of this? Let me guess…. from the ‘rich’, right?
March 21st, 2007 at 2:34 pm“Why some of you insist on twisting my view and painting me as one of your ‘trolls’ is testimony to your unreasonable fanaticism for this unproven theory.” Comment by Smack — March 21, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
The fact that a vast majority of scientists — worldwide — agree that there is such a thing as global warming and that it is likely caused by humans, I tend to believe the theory. And the scientists.
After all, they are the ones with the brains to earn Ph.Ds, publish articles published in top-tier international academic journals, and they the statistical and mathematical knowledge to conduct experiments.
I do not believe the slim minority of deniers because 1) most of them do not have the intelligence, the knowledge, the education, and the experience of climate scientists — see Inhofe and the propagandists at Faux News for instance –(2) even if a minuscule proportion of the deniers have the requisite knowledge and intelligence, they are inevitably closely associated with oil companies / lobbyists, hence their motives are highly suspect; 3) they are a small minority that decries global warming without EVER being able to argue satisfactorily (i.e. provide robust statistical evidence) that they are correct.
The day the global warming deniers can test their null hypothesis that global warming does not exist and show that this null hypothesis is true with a 95% (i am not even insisting on a 99% confidence level) level of confidence, I’ll believe them.
If you don’t understand what a confidence level is, I suggest you take Statistics 101.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:35 pmMy main point is that Science (this issue particularly) is being hijacked for political purposes. All I’m trying to say is to be skeptical with regards to the solutions being offered. Climate Change is real. Humans add to the deterioration of the Ecosystem. Pollution is a real problem.
I mainly question the agenda here and suspect that some claims are exaggerated.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:35 pmGore has totally lost it. He never quite recovered from the 2000 election loss.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:37 pmI agree the climate changes and is changing but a ban on CO2, carbon dioxide? That would mean you may inhale O oxygen but you may no longer exhale CO2 or fart methane CH4 unless you purchase a sufficient number of carbon offsets.
You may continue to burn hydrocarbons in cars and factories that produce deadly carbon monoxide CO, ozone O3, sulfur dioxide SO2, nitrogen dioxide NO2.
Tweedster -
That is an idiotic comparison. Are you aware of how Science works?
Have you heard of peer review? How about logical fallacies? The one you just employed is called an ‘Appeal to ridicule’.
Thanks. Drive thru, Bozo.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:37 pmRoger, dude that’s a lot better a post than that one about gas being $1.15 a gallon by today. Good post Rog.
I think you would enjoy Jim Kunstler on Clusterf*** Nation and ‘the Long Emergency’ - don’t have the link.
Does anyone still listen to Darth Cheney anymore?
“The American way of life is non-negotiable”.
I happen to think he’s right, but he doesn’t know why he’s right. And Dubai is a bit low lying….maybe he does drink his own koolaid.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:40 pmDevil’s Advocate —
Your assumption that a “vast majority of scientists — worldwide — agree”
is faulty. This is not consistent with the facts. There is still Scientific debate going on. The fact that proponents of the theory are given the majority of the Government grants is what initially gives me pause as to the impartiality of the science.
Draw your own conclusions about the science, but don’t assume there is no debate.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:43 pmTweedster -
That is an idiotic comparison. Are you aware of how Science works?
Have you heard of peer review? How about logical fallacies? The one you just employed is called an ‘Appeal to ridicule’.
Thanks. Drive thru, Bozo
tweedie the queenie
March 21st, 2007 at 2:51 pmGood one Heh
Freeze the CO2!
March 21st, 2007 at 2:52 pmFreeze the CO2!
Freeze the CO2!
Freeze the CO2!
Freeze the CO2!
122 - there are some anthropologists who hold that the “debate” over the existence of Bigfoot is not settled, either. i don’t know about you, but when I gamble, I like to have some reasonable assurance there’s a chance, however remote, that I’m going to win.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:53 pmSmack - I’m not sure “the great… swindle” qualifies as ’scientific debate’ - nor does Inconvenient Truth by the way.
Oh and you need to be called on your post about mixing science and politics - you specifically denied that climate change was significantly anthroprogenic in post #62. You have only presented a recent documentary to support your position. So which is your position - climate change is not anthroprogenic or the proposed solutions are all warped? Or both?
You’ve focussed in on the politics to suggest that the politics invalidate the science. Sorry, science is about facts and theories fitting facts. Deal with politics and science separately not together.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:56 pmPost #119 - did someone fart in here?
March 21st, 2007 at 2:57 pmTake the fascist self-assessment and see where you rank!
In the face of a dissenting opinion, you:
A. Listen thoughtfully to the arguments presented and present a counter to them.
B. Call the opinion-holder an X-denier, likening him or her to Holocaust deniers for holding said opinion.
C. Attack the intellectual stature of the opinion-holder, as obviously all intelligent individuals must agree.
D. Claim all debate by the “experts” is settled despite those funny letters after the names of those who continue the debate.
E. Claim that anyone holding such an opinion must have been paid by someone evil since they disagree with you.
F. All of the above except A.
If you’ve answered A, congratulations. You’re fascist-free!
March 21st, 2007 at 2:57 pmIf you’ve answered B-E, congratulations. You have fascist tendencies, but they can be overcome with intense psychotherapy.
If you’ve answered F, you’re far beyond the help of modern medicine. Strap on those boots and get ready to march.
#125 –
Your comparison with global climatology and the existence of ‘Bigfoot’ is hilarious.
thanks for the laugh.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:57 pmTerrytheTurtle –
My assertion is that politics is influencing science. Clear enough?
I agree that there is an anthropogenic component. My opinion is that some of the data is exaggerated in order to create the appearance of an impending crisis, which our loving government will then provide us with a ‘convenient’ solution.
I’m almost certain it will involve siphoning off our cash and depositing it into the very corporations causing the lion’s share of the very problem we aim to solve.
I don’t know how much plainer I can make it.
March 21st, 2007 at 3:11 pm#130,
You idiot. “Science” is not a thing, it is a methodology. Politics cannot “influence” science because any politics inserted into the methodology then makes it non-scientific, ie; non-science.
And, in order to validate your “opinion”, please enlighten all here with your scientific or research credentials. I mean, you are claiming that the scientific data is false and to make such an assertion one must also have evidence to back that up and some sort of credibility. Please, enlighten us.
March 21st, 2007 at 3:28 pmPRAGUE – Czech President Vaclav Klaus said on Wednesday that fighting global warming has turned into a a ‘religion’ that replaced the ideology of communism and threatens to clip basic freedoms.
The right-wing president, a free-market champion, wrote to the U.S. Congress that adopting tough environmental policies to fight climate change would have destructive impact on national economies.
‘Communism has been replaced by the threat of an ambitious environmentalism,’ Klaus wrote in response to questions from the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Energy and Commerce.
March 21st, 2007 at 3:30 pmAnd so 300m are supposed to not only cut emissions, but bring 1.6bn into the 21st century. And you think I’m worried about a retirement package? Please tell me how we’re supposed to help bring China ‘green’ electricity without devastating our economy.
March 21st, 2007 at 3:35 pmYour comparison with global climatology and the existence of ‘Bigfoot’ is hilarious.
thanks for the laugh.
Comment by Smack — March 21, 2007 @ 2:57 pm
Where’d you get your degree in physics or are you a math genius. Because you certainly seem to think you have all the answers based on oil company data. You hijacked this whole thread, thanks for nothing.
March 21st, 2007 at 3:39 pm#121 The problem we face is still one of inaction. We can’t wait to run out of Oil as the world is doomed long before that happens. In reality, there is enough Oil left for big Oil to put a pretty good fight up if they choose. To see if they want to fight, we first need to get the Dems to started acting and doing something. Big Oil currently has no problems as we aren’t doing anything. The Dems need to find alternatives NOW and they need to start implementing them NOW. Big Oil may try to fight once that happens. They will probably increase the amount of Oil drilled dramatically to reduce the price and attempt to kill the market for an alternative. This is where we need the Dems to step up. We need an alternative that people are going to be comfortable with and it needs to be easy to use. We also need ample supplies that most “gas stations” carry. Furthermore, we need Congres (AFTER THE ALTERNATIVE IS UP AND RUNNING) increase taxes on gas. It is important to make sure any new tax to discourage gas use is done only after we have an alterantive that most all gas stations carry. Otherwise, we are simply hurting Americans for no reason as they don’t have any other options.
Furthermore, the Dems need set mandates to freeze emissions increases to 1990 levels. They also need to design a complete program that reduces emissions by at least 30% from 1990 levels and they need to do it today. After all these things are done and in place, they need to demand China and India meet our standards. They need to fine them right away on every single export equal to the amount of extra emissions they are causing. These fines needs to stay in place until they reach the USA’s new emission standards. These fines need to be large enough to make sure our economy doesn’t completely collapse and they need to be large enough to absolutely force them to lower emissions immediately.
If the Dems would do this, I would become a life long Dem even though I disagree with most every other economic and military opinion you folks have. Global Warming is simply the biggest and most important issue facing mankind. I am sick of discussing issues that either will never be changed anyways or simply fail to matter at all.
March 21st, 2007 at 3:39 pm#126 - “….Deal with politics and science separately not together…..”
Comment by TtT
Would love to deal with politics and science separately,Terry. Please express the same to Al Gore - he hasn’t quite gotten your message.
The evidence of the Left’s mixing politics and science is easily seen in the Kyoto Accord. IF reducing the impact mankind has on the atmosphere and environment WAS legitimately the concern of self-proclaimed environmentalists, they would as stridently call for India, China, etc. to become more eco-friendly. The Kyoto Accords are not designed to promote a healthier planet - the design is based in punishing capitalistic achievement. Kyoto is designed to co-opt a popular theory and use it to reduce the West.
What is missing from the argument is the understanding by Leftists that capital investment and returns will be achieved through capitalism - not socialism or communism. Identifying a problem, taking a risk to address a problem and reaping rewards have been motivating factors throughout history. Today is no different.
March 21st, 2007 at 3:46 pmDoes anyone know where I can find the actual sl