All politics aside, and irrespective of how true specific claims about global warming are,
it seems that the worst thing we can do is nothing.

If we continue on our present course, there will likely be a World War for access to the
world’s oil, as supply dwindles at an increasing rate. If that war becomes nuclear,
it could spawn a nuclear winter. At that point, global warming becomes irrelevant, since
it would be offset by the nuclear winter.

Our children and grandchildren will then inherit an almost uninhabitable earth.

Does your microwave work, you idiot?

Do thermonuclear bombs work, silly?

Did the actions taken to retard the human induced hole in the ozone layer work, you douchebags?

Yes, yes and yes.

And tell, me Willfully Ignorant, why do all of those things work? The same reason that the magical computing device that you’re reading this on works- because science works. Take your religious blasphem and shove it up your —.

Does your microwave work, you idiot?

Do thermonuclear bombs work, you idiots?

Did the actions taken to retard the human induced hole in the ozone layer work, you douchebags?

Yes, yes and yes.

And tell, me Willfully Ignorant, why do all of those things work? The same reason that the magical computing device that you’re reading this on works- because science works. Take your religious blasphem and shove it up your —.

To paraphrase something I heard long ago: “The weakness of ones own argument can be judged by the level of violent opposition to any other argument.”

Modern “liberalism”, being primarily negative in nature, cannot see that the solutions to all ills come from the mind of man, and that the knowledge and intuition endowed by our creator will eventually find solutions to what ails us.”

Comment by O. Bigfoot — November 14, 2007 @ 9:58 am

0. Bigfoot,

You’re joking, right?

“…deems any opposing thought to be dangerous…”
“…violent opposition to any other argument.”
“…primarily negative in nature…”

Dangerous, violent and negative?
Liberalism, huh?
No, that would be your president and his partners in crime.

Comment by DreamCrusher — November 14, 2007 @ 11:49 am

What is “quite a few”? Who are they and what are their qualifications? Do they have any conlict of interests?

Are you implying that John Coleman is credible?

I’ll never believe those lying melting icebergs.

Comment by Starve-A-Bush_Feed-A-Beaver — November 14, 2007 @ 12:12 pm

Wow. Now THAT’s a ringing endorsement. That’s kinda like regarsing Prussian Blue as a leading voice among the racist fringe of white supremacists.

“Yes, but Coleman is highly regarded by conservatives as a leading conservative voice among the discredited fringe of global warming deniers.”

You’re a _neo_-conservative, someone who professes to believe in Christ and the Free Market, who refuses to put merit in science, who just wants to feel better than everyone else.

There’s a reason I didn’t lump the neos in with the true conservatives.

And I’ve digested what you’ve said, and your buddy, O.Bigfoot too. I stand by my claim. The only thing important to you and yours is getting what you want, and to hell with anyone else who is in your way. But I shouldn’t complain TOO much. After all, screwing over anyone who has what you want then taking it from them is what we’re all expected to do in America today.

Comment by O. Bigfoot — November 14, 2007 @ 9:58 am

Which “us” are you referring to? I’m guessing white suburbanite Americans. I suggest you visit the giant smokestack that is Beijing or the open sewer that is the Hooghli river in India to see that the vast majority of the world is NOT cleaner than it was 100 years ago.

100 years ago, we did not have CFCs in the atmosphere degrading the ozone layer. 100 years ago, we did not have plastics precipitating in the oceans and choking marine life. 100 years ago, we did not have nearly as many petroleum-based fertilizers leeching into groundwater, running off into streams, and creating vast dead zones in the oceans. 100 years ago, we did not have two SUVs per family putting tons of carbon into the atmosphere per day.

And putting all of tour blind faith in the free market is a recipe for disaster. The free market, much like the tooth fairy and Islamofascism, is a myth. It doesn’t exist in the real world – only on the blackboards of Econ 101 professors. There never has been a free market and never will be. Markets are universally lopsided, corrupted, subsidized, and controlled.

Yes, business will be part of the climate change solution. But governments will have to be, too. As will international trade agreements. This is a global problem and it requires a truly global solution.

I do not profess to be a Conservative. Further, I don’t think you have really internalized what I am saying here.

Hits

I feel a distinct urge to continue my way of life. I believe it is a more intelligent way of doing things. I will support you in your “war against global warming” if you assume my costs as well.

Hits

Comment by hits — November 14, 2007 @ 8:09 am
==================================================
This is the heart and soul of the neo-conservative way of life. “I’ve got mine. F**k all y’all.”

“The world can turn into a Venusian Class planet for all I care. I wanna drive my big honkin’ SUV and have my huge honkin’ house and consume consume consume ALL I want!”

“The United States can turn into a Fascist Country that would make Mussolini proud, where the harsh laws only apply to those without cold hard cash. I just know I’ll be part of that ruling elite, so f**k all y’all.”

“Everyone else in the world is a danger to MY way of life. The whole world is a bunch of Commiislamopinkofascistterrists (TM). F**k ‘em all!”

Or to reduce the neoconservative political group’s positions to three words: “F**k you all.”

Comment by francie — November 13, 2007 @ 11:38 pm

Cow flatulence is part of the human-caused global warming problem. Without human agriculture there wouldn’t be millions of bovine fermentation vats putting out tons of methane every year.

You are partially correct. You (and others) have the option of not being influenced by my opinions. However, I would posit that the “thread” and the “topic” are larger than me or you. So, I cannot derail anything.

Hits

The threads are less likely to be disrupted if you simply ignore trolls like hits. The troll has succeeded several times recently in dominating a thread with its own mindless posts and scores of posts from people trying to “argue” with hits, or even to scream at it. DNFTT.