IPCC report warns of urgent need to act on global warming.
By on Nov 18th, 2007 at 10:40 am
IPCC report warns of urgent need to act on global warming.
The Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change yesterday issued “their starkest warning yet on global warming.” The report notably said that evidence of the planet’s warming was now “unequivocal” and the effects on the climate system could be “abrupt or irreversible.” Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC, said, “What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future.”
UPDATE: Yesterday, presidential candidates John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, and Dennis Kucinich attended a forum on global warming. Heading Left, MyDD, D-Day, Daily Kos’ hekebelos, and Calitics liveblogged the event.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Beck
Birther
Brown
Budget
Bush
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
DADT
Deficit
Economy
Education
Election
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Global Warming
Haiti
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iran
Justice
LGBT
Limbaugh
Lobbying
McCain
Media
Military
National Security
O'Keefe
Obama
Palin
Race
Radical Right
Robertson
Sports
Steele
Steve King
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Terrorism
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Let’s do it. Let’s act.
November 18th, 2007 at 10:51 amGlobal warming may be knocking on our door sooner than we think.
I recommend Tom Englehardt’s excellent article about worldwide drought: “How dry we are- a question no one wants to raise about drought.” http://tomdispatch.com
“It’s not just the Southeast of the United States. Europe has had its great droughts and water shortages. Australia is in the grip of a drought that’s almost unbelievable in its ferocity. Again, this is a global picture. We’re just getting much less usable water than we did a decade or two or three decades ago. It’s a sort of thing again that the climate models are predicting
November 18th, 2007 at 10:56 amThe primary impediment to this country taking action quickly enough, IMHO, is the ridiculous fantasy that “the market will find the best solution.” This has been the biggest excuse for inaction since serious efforts were made to raise public awareness more than 30 years ago. The fallacy is in thinking that only a “profitable solution” should be considered. We need to act and act quickly regardless of the cost in dollars, because the cost in human lives will far exceed that. if we don’t. We must stop using “The Market” as an excuse to not do what’s right. That thinking is nothing but a defense of wealthy peoples’ excessive fortunes.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:02 amThe only thing that bothers me in the global warming debate is the use of the term “irreversible.”
Nature always seeks balance. The global warming trend will be “reversed,” albeit after much, if not all, humans have been removed from the ecosystem. I would guess ten to fifty thousand years would be sufficient for the planet to become hospitible to major life forms again. Maybe even sooner, if Yellowstone blows up again, plunging the planet into a global winter for a couple/three years.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:02 amTen to fifty thousand years? I hope Walt Disney’s cryochamber has a big battery or he’s going to be p!ssed.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:04 amBnF,
I agree with you in that the problem will be reversed after all the humans are gone. I believe that the use of the term “irreversible” is meant to make people aware that we don’t have all the time in the world to act before the planet becomes inhabitable for humans. Once that happens, the problem will be, as far as humans are concerned, “irreversible”. I wouldn’t be surprised if “the market”’s solution is astronaut-type space suits for everyone, rather than any kind of attempt to prevent things from going that far. Again, we have to stop thinking of our problems’ solutions as only being worthwhile if they are hugely profitable.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:13 amso TP is a liberal blog then HOW come my comments with another computer do not show up unless I use the computer with the cookie with that username
So much for freedom of speach ………. I knew this site was a fake
and cant handle anti american comments
November 18th, 2007 at 11:13 amThat shouold read: “before the planet becomes uninhabitable for humans”. Sorry for the confusion.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:14 amI can deal with the ten year estimate but the fifty thousand year estimate might exceed my lifetime.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:14 amComment by Blurpy Bardfast — November 18, 2007 @ 11:13 am
This discussion is for grown-ups, so please go away.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:18 amWayne, you are absolutely right. The central religious belief of capitalist ideology is that free markets will fix everything. The biggest joke of all is that most people who call themselves capitalists aren’t even that: they are industrialists who do everything in their power through corruption of government to prevent free markets from operating. They create an even more perverse world in which markets are denied a level playing field, making it even less likely that markets will ever mitigate the problem.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:22 amAnd then, there’s Atlanta, its metropolitan area “watered†mainly by a 1950s man-made reservoir, Lake Lanier, which, in dramatic photos, is turning into baked mud. And yet, depending on which article you read, Atlanta will essentially run out of water by New Year’s eve, in 80 days, in 120 days, or, according to the Army Corps of Engineers — which seems to find this reassuring — in 375 days, if the drought continues (as it may well do).
And then???
November 18th, 2007 at 11:23 amIf BUSH and the HOUSE of CROOK’S would have spent the Trillions on Green Technologies.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:25 ami heard a snippet of a story about some “technicians” leaving a mic open and the press learning some inside info at the OPEC meeting…
anyone know what that was about???
November 18th, 2007 at 11:25 amTo extend my previous comment with a concrete example, Big Oil is a big player in promoting the corn-to-ethanol approach, which will do exactly nothing to solve the global warming problem, but which happens to be a technology that Big Oil can easily exploit for profits. So huge subsidies are going to this approach instead of useful alternative energy sources that don’t produce greenhouse gases.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:26 amAnd then???
Comment by Badger — November 18, 2007 @ 11:23 am
Then they convince someone to pump water from Oregon to Atlanta and drain the Columbia River dry. “We can’t just abandon Atlanta! It has too much history!”
November 18th, 2007 at 11:27 amThe free market’s traditional reaction to resource shortage: Hoarding and Gouging.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:28 amWe can’t just abandon Atlanta! It has too much history!â€
Comment by gummitch — November 18, 2007 @ 11:27 am
Yeah…just like New Orleans.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:30 amThe free market’s traditional reaction to resource shortage: Hoarding and Gouging.
Comment by Badger — November 18, 2007 @ 11:28 am
True. And when someone manages to become fabulously wealthy quickly by doing this, they are hailed as a capitalist hero by Capitalist Pigs on Fox Noise Channel business shows. “Capitalist Pigs” is the perfect term for them, because those people are inhuman.
Either you care about your fellow human beings on this planet, or you only care about yourself. Whose side are you on? Since I can’t live on this planet alone, I choose to be on my fellow human beings’ side.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:33 amTechniques to convert wastes to hydrogen exist now and are actually not that new. Each of these techniques produce more net energy than is used in the conversion process.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:41 amRealistically there is no chance that the world citizens will wake up to the seriosness of he situation as outlined by the IPCC and many other entitites.
It will require much more sacrifice than the average prson is willing to committ to in order to conserve resources.
80% by 2050? We’ll be lucky if we can refrain from adding less than 5% a year for the next ten years. At that point you can all kiss your sweet petoot goodbye.
You don’t really thing the “haves” are playing this game not to win all the chips in the game and walk away form the table do you?
Bangladesh is just another Katrina in name only. The ownership society is not constructed to belong to you. How easily misled you are.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:47 ami never understood the logic behind this:
You don’t really thing the “haves†are playing this game not to win all the chips in the game and walk away form the table do you?
Comment by civil behavior — November 18, 2007 @ 11:47 am
as in, “you can’t take it with you”…
and, just how much does one, or a family, NEED???
greed is sin.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:56 am.
Dreamcrusher: I get your sarcasm; however, it’s totally implausible with the onerous schedules of the presidential candidates for them to capitalize on a weather disaster and stage an immediate forum. Nice try at attempting to trivialize both the global warming crisis as well as the suggestion that someone more altruistic than yourself happens to care about an oncoming disaster.
As Wayne Schneider says above – the Bush isolationists clearly care about no one but themselves and since we must coexist with other human beings on the planet, a good place to be conscious-wise would be in the unification of all man for a common goal – which just happens to be the potential thwarting of the extinction of our species and our planet.
Nice try, tough.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:57 amThe Bangledesh disaster is evidence of changing weather patterns which are global in nature these days.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:58 amComment by Blurpy Bardfast — November 18, 2007 @ 11:13 am
I answered this post on another thread where you posted nearly identical language. You can find it (Comment by hterrya — November 18, 2007 @ 11:45 am) at: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/11/17/murtha-vindicated/#comments
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 pmBadger: Thanks for the link in #2. Obviously, the Bush “planet destroyers” want to trivialize the science as well as the evidence. Since it would mean Bush’s whoring corporations have to take a hit by adjusting their polluting practices, of course, he’s trying (some 825 pieces of evidence to tampering with scientific documents to date) to squelch the science and trivialize the coming disaster. When it comes to greed, I’m afraid to say that the Bush administration and anyone even remotely associated with it has a “corner on the market”. Greed at all cost – and it’s beginning to look like this level of vulgar greed may cost us our planet Earth.
Where’s Al Gore? We really need him to come in and rescue this country from it’s obvious death wish.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:02 pmNice try, tough.
Comment by Veritas — November 18, 2007 @ 11:57 am
It was NOT a “nice try.” It was troll dung! Please report this troll for abuse!
Thanks.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:02 pmMy wish is that I live long enough to witness Bush and his crime cabal being brought to the justice they deserve – tampering with science (latest evidence has to do with epidemics and diseases which are brought on by global warming where he tampered with CDC evidence and is a “crime against humanity”) is just one of the hallmarks of this capricious, corrupt, greedy administration.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:03 pmhterrya: I already have! This troll is a total moronic dipstick.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:04 pmThe Bangledesh disaster is evidence of changing weather patterns which are global in nature these days.
Comment by Veritas — November 18, 2007 @ 11:58 am
Bangladesh has been plagued with disasters like this since Partition and undoubtedly for centuries before that. It’s one big floodplain and is battered every year by floods and cyclones. Just ask George Harrison. Well, wait, you can’t do that, but check the history.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:05 pmComment by Briseadh na Faire — November 18, 2007 @ 11:02 am
The earth will eventually correct itself….with our assistance or without our presence.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:05 pmbadger,
I didn’t want to leave you with a false impression. My emphasis of the word “you” in the second parargraph was directed to humanity at large, not you in particular. I already know whose side you are on. I’ll go away now. Thanks.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:07 pmWay to seize the moment guys.
Comment by DreamCrusher — November 18, 2007 @ 11:48 am
Most Americans don’t care about the people in Bangladesh, so your comment is a bit far-fetched. But anything to derail the discussion, eh? If this is the best you can do, it stinks.
On another subject: why do so many trolls use handles that smack of violence and hatred? “We’ll crush your dreams” is it, assh*le?
November 18th, 2007 at 12:10 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider — November 18, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
No problem, Wayne. I already know whose side you are on too.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:11 pmComment by Veritas — November 18, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
Thanks, Veritas. I see a possiblity for ALL the threads to be clear of troll dung, if we keep on reporting them for abuse, and REFUSE to respond to their dung!
November 18th, 2007 at 12:12 pmFor those who want an updated take on the climate research and effort to use a multidisciplinary approach may I suggest a new book out entitled “under a Green Sky” by Peter Ward.
It’s more current than most and brings the world of carbon, fossils and oceans into a whole new dimension.
Anyone else read it?
November 18th, 2007 at 12:12 pmhterrya: I already have! This troll is a total moronic dipstick.
Comment by Veritas — November 18, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
==============================================
He may be a moron but he’s also good comedy material.
Comment by DreamCrusher — November 15, 2007 @ 7:59 am
November 18th, 2007 at 12:18 pmThink Progress states unequivocally that “meteorologists generally have thin knowledge of long-term climate patternsâ€
This, again, goes to the point I keep making whenever a Global Warming denier shows up here. And that is, “are you willing to bet the lives of your children and grandchildren that you are right”. They mostly don’t answer. I don’t care if I was a global warming skeptic, I would still see the sense in doing something about the pollutants we are pumping into the air, because if I am wrong, the consequence is the end of life on earth.
I am also constantly amazed that anyone could think we can pump tons of pollutants into our atmosphere and it would not have a negative affect on the earth.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:19 pmWe think the OIL WARS are getting bad?
November 18th, 2007 at 12:20 pmJust wait for the Water Wars…….
Anyone catch History Detectives on PBS yesterday?
In the late 1940’s-early 50’s, Standard Oil, Uniroyal(?) Tire, and GM, through a holding company known as “United City Lines” (oxymoron!) conspired to buy all large municipal electric transit systems and dismantle them. Consequently, they could sell buses, tires, and gasoline to the cities once the electric transit system was put to sleep.
http://www.lovearth.net/gmdeliberatelydestroyed.htm
I guess the idea of pollution becoming a public health risk was as far-out as cigarette smoking causing cancer. However, the fact remains there was nefarious activity involved in the fall of electric mass transit and the simultaneous rise in automobile usage.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:22 pmAnd the amazing thing, Bilbo, is that an aggressive energy conservation program would actually save a lot of money, AND greatly reduce the power of terrorist-coddling states like Saudi Arabia. It is a win-win proposition.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:23 pmJust wait for the Water Wars…….
Comment by Wayne
I’m thinking we’ll need Kevin Costner to help us find “Dryland”.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:23 pmOn Topic:
The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change convinces me that the Panel DESERVED to share the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore!
Just the observation by Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC, “What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future.â€, rated a Nobel Peace Prize in my opinion.
It was a wake-up call for the world, and especially for those in the U.S. who have contributed MOST to the depth of the problem – global conglomerates operating with impunity under a current corrupt, criminal administration that was bought and paid for by those same conglomerates.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:24 pmComment by DieNowForPeace — November 18, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Yes, Los Angeles had an extensive electric rail system in the 1950s that was destroyed on behalf of the car and oil companies.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:25 pmComment by civil behavior — November 18, 2007 @ 11:47 am
First, I would point out that many of us ont he left are already quite aware of the problems of wealth inequality in this country. The “haves” want to have more while making sure the “have nots” can only have less. This is not news to us.
Second, there are solutions that can reduce the effects humans are having on the environment and, yes, they are expensive. But they can make a huge difference in whether or not humans can continue to survive within the future climate we are helping to bring about. It’s the greedy, selfish, “I-got-mine-you-can’t-have-yours” mentality of the capitalists that’s impeding our nation from joining the rest of the world in not only acknowledging the problem, but doing something about it.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:27 pmComment by VerbalKint
So did Dallas. You know, in an oil “rich” state like California.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:27 pmIf you believe in human-caused “global warming,” then you must immediately:
1) Take your cars to the junkyard and have them scrapped. (Can’t sell them, because then they’d just be used by someone else to destroy the planet).
2) Take a wrench out to your gas main, and turn off the gas to your house.
3) Walk out to your electric panel, and turn all the circuit breakers off.
If you haven’t done this already, then you’re part of the problem. You don’t need to wait for a government program to raise taxes to discourage you from using your cars, gas, and electricity. You can do it yourself by following those above three steps. Empower yourself to fight “global warming.” And think of how much money you could save every month! You could use that money to buy bicycles, walking shoes, and lots of blankets.
If you believe in “global warming” and you haven’t done those three things, how can you sleep at night living in hypocrisy?
November 18th, 2007 at 12:34 pmJust wait for the Water Wars…….
Comment by Wayne
The second civil war may be between the water poor states and the ones with plentiful water. It is doubtful that the water rich rust-belt states are going to be willing to just give their water away.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:35 pmComment by bilbobaggins — November 18, 2007 @ 12:19 pm
Good tactic. It’s exactly the same as when the religious right asks us atheists and agnostics, “Are you willing to bet your eternal soul that you are right?” My answer to them is “Yes, because I know I am right.” I also know that we are right about the fact that human activity is altering the climate of this planet in such a way that extreme weather patterns will become the norm rather than the exception. And extreme weather can not only kill people, it can wreak unimaginable devastation on our properties and national infrastructure. This in turn causes not only massive disruption in peoples’ daily lives, but likely increases commuting time to work every day which, in turn, means not only more money spent at the pump (to the benefit of Big Oil and other global-warming deniers), but increased pollution to make the problem even worse.
No wonder the oil and gas industries are behind the effort to discredit global warming and climate change. They see the status quo as hugely profitable for them in the long run. Too bad they don’t realize that dead people don’t buy gas. They should put more of their huge profits into ensuring their future customers’ survival rather than lining their own pockets with them. But maybe that’s just me.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:37 pmAnyone catch History Detectives on PBS yesterday?
In the late 1940’s-early 50’s, Standard Oil, Uniroyal(?) Tire, and GM, through a holding company known as “United City Lines†(oxymoron!) conspired to buy all large municipal electric transit systems and dismantle them. Consequently, they could sell buses, tires, and gasoline to the cities once the electric transit system was put to sleep.
http://www.lovearth.net/gmdeliberatelydestroyed.htm
I guess the idea of pollution becoming a public health risk was as far-out as cigarette smoking causing cancer. However, the fact remains there was nefarious activity involved in the fall of electric mass transit and the simultaneous rise in automobile usage.
Comment by DieNowForPeace — November 18, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
Why do people find “conspiracy theories” so hard to believe?
November 18th, 2007 at 12:42 pmIf you believe in “global warming†and you haven’t done those three things, how can you sleep at night living in hypocrisy?
Comment by muckdog — November 18, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
This parade of strawman arguments is so lame that it is self-debunking. No one here is going to buy into this sort of childish rant.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:46 pmWhy do people find “conspiracy theories†so hard to believe?
Comment by Bluedahlia — November 18, 2007 @ 12:42 pm
If someone dismisses a conspiracy theory out of hand, just ask them whether or not they believe that the Mafia crime syndicate exists.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:48 pmMuckdog has been pushing the same ludicrous false dichotomy here for the past year: your only two choices are commit suicide, or plunder the earth with wanton abandon. The rhetorical ineptitude is comical to observe. But this seems to be the best the deniers have to offer these days.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:50 pmComment by serial troll to get us off topic — November 18, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
Troll dung.
And the troll got what it wanted @ 12:46 pm and @ 12:50 pm: recognition, and a chance to throw the thread further off topic.
Report the trolls for abuse, please, rather than responding to them, or we will eventually have as much troll dung on the threads as we did BEFORE TP’s new registration and “Report Abuse” system went into effect.
Thank you.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:59 pmComment by DreamCrusher — November 18, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
Try posting something coherent next time.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:19 pmIt’s a Sunday, which means that the trolls have to wing it alone without their daily talking points briefing, and it shows.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:21 pmstart here, hillbilly:
REDUCE YOUR IMPACT AT HOME
Most emissions from homes are from the fossil fuels burned to generate electricity and heat. By using energy more efficiently at home, you can reduce your emissions and lower your energy bills by more than 30%.
In addition, since agriculture is responsible for about a fifth of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, you can reduce your emissions simply by watching what you eat.
Here’s how: http://www.climatecrisis.net/takeaction/whatyoucando/
November 18th, 2007 at 1:39 pmCut down your carbon footprint, Billy Idiot. Vote for politicians who take climate change seriously.
I ride a bike to work and for many errands. My wife and I share one car that gets high mileage, and we drive it less than 10,000 miles per year, which is well under the average for a two-earner American family. We thermostat most of our house to 55 degrees in the winter, and heat only two rooms to a comfortable 70 with an efficient gas fireplace. We have gone to great lengths to weatherize our house (we live in Minnesota). We only air condition two rooms in our house, and only if the temperature indoors exceeds 80 degrees.
We buy mostly whole foods, much of which is grown locally, rather than energy-intensive industrial foods (read the Omnivore’s dilemma if you want to learn more about this). We don’t buy cheap plastic crap at WalMart. We live in a small house and when we buy a piece of furniture, we buy it for life. We reduce before we reuse, and we reuse before we recycle.
We use all compact fluorescent bulbs. We use a front loading washing machine that is extremely efficient and uses 1/3 the water of a top loader. We air dry our clothes, even in the winter. We have a hot water heat exchanger instead of a wasteful tank.
If every American behaved like us, the country could reduce its energy use by 30-50% overnight.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:41 pmBilly Retard, we also put our computers to sleep or turn them off when possible, all our electronics are very efficient, we buy minimal clothing, we turn off lights, we keep our car tires inflated, we practice smart thermal management of our house by opening and closing windows at appropriate times, we carpool with friends when going out (when we aren’t riding our bikes), and more. And because we are physically fit we will incur much lower medical bills in our lifetime than a fat drunk like you, which means those resources will be freed up for other purposes.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:47 pmAnd the amazing thing, Bilbo, is that an aggressive energy conservation program would actually save a lot of money, AND greatly reduce the power of terrorist-coddling states like Saudi Arabia. It is a win-win proposition.
Comment by VerbalKint
You also need to include in your equation new jobs. If we start working on energy conservation, including finding new sources of energy, we will create many new jobs and an infusion into our economy. The only people who will lose are the oil companies and that doesn’t bother me a bit. They have been fleecing us for years and it’s time that stops.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:50 pmAND WE SAVE MONEY LIVING THIS WAY.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:51 pmIf every American behaved like us, the country could reduce its energy use by 30-50% overnight.
Comment by VerbalKint — November 18, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
It is clear you consider those who control global conglomerates and create MOST of human-caused climate change, with their HUGE carbon footprints, to be Americans. I don’t.
Think Haliburton in Dubai.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:51 pmYou are right again, Bilbo! Transformation of our energy sources would lead to a new, vibrant economic sector. It is a win-win-win-win situation.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:52 pmIf you believe in “global warming†and you haven’t done those three things, how can you sleep at night living in hypocrisy?
Comment by muckdog
How do you sleep at night knowing what a moron you are?
November 18th, 2007 at 1:55 pmThe “idiot factor” is what breaks my heart. There is no valid technical reason why every private vehicle can’t exceed 35 mpg. The elimination of incandescent bulbs would save a huge amount of energy. Until we manage to shut up the morons who maintain that we have to dismantle society to alleviate the problem; we are doomed.
November 18th, 2007 at 1:55 pmTell us what we each should be doing TODAY to help save the planet.
Comment by Billy Hill
Try doing a little research Hillbilly. I know that research is a foreign word to you, but I’ll help you out by pointing you in the right direction. Try reading this book for a start:
Living Green: A Practical Guide to Simple Sustainability
November 18th, 2007 at 2:00 pmby the way I am a registered Democrat. Global warming and the loss of millions of lives is not funny, it is real and should be delt with on that level.
Comment by Billy Hill
You are a registered Democrat, and I’m the Queen of England.
November 18th, 2007 at 2:01 pm“If you can help I will be more than willing to use your advice to help save the planet.”
Comment by serial troll November 18, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
This is, of course, a ruse. If you read his stuff on other threads, you’ll figure out how insincere he is in wanting “to help save the planet.”
Please don’t respond to the troll. Report him for abuse.
November 18th, 2007 at 2:05 pmTroll comment November 18, 2007 @ 2:10 pm: Off-Topic Troll Dung
Ignore and report for abuse, please.
Thanks.
November 18th, 2007 at 2:13 pmIt is clear you consider those who control global conglomerates and create MOST of human-caused climate change, with their HUGE carbon footprints, to be Americans. I don’t.
Think Haliburton in Dubai.
Comment by hterrya — November 18, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
But Americans do use more energy than any other country in the world. And the best way to reduce the power of Halliburton and Dubai is to conserve energy. We can bring those people to their knees if we all work together to cut energy use and transition away from oil and towards renewable energy sources.
November 18th, 2007 at 2:14 pmExcerpt from The Sixth Extinction,
by Richard Leakey and Roger Lewin (Doubleday, 1995)
November 18th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
I love it when gas prices go up….that means the libs have less money to spend on Birkenstock’s, shampoo, weed and that new
Comment by Billy Hill
..this year has been much cooler than average. In a normal summer we have 3 days of 100 degrees or higher, this year NONE, in an average year we have 12 days above 90 degrees, this year 3….it is getting cooler here in Washington state.
Comment by Billy Hill
How dare you people even question for one moment the laws of global warming and works of the worlds greatest scientist Al Goreilla. This is treasonous. You should be incarcerated for even thinking otherwise.
Comment by Billy Hill —
November 18th, 2007 at 2:17 pmBilly Hill, if you are being straight here, then please accept my apologies for calling you names. I commend anyone for taking concrete steps to cut their carbon footprint. Action by individuals, both singly and collectively, can accomplish much. Drive less! Use compact fluorescents! Don’t buy plastic junk! Weather strip your home!
November 18th, 2007 at 2:17 pmBut Americans do use more energy than any other country in the world. And the best way to reduce the power of Halliburton and Dubai is to conserve energy. We can bring those people to their knees if we all work together to cut energy use and transition away from oil and towards renewable energy sources.
Comment by VerbalKint — November 18, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
Granted, you’re right about our energy use, but the chance of being able “bring those people to their knees” (i.e., the global conglomerates like Haliburton and EXXONMOBIL) by our own conservation practices, ignores the stranglehold these polluters and carbon footprint GIANTS have on the world economy and OUR government. We need to control the conglomerates through something more than their rigged economic system.
See what a nice discussion we can have when we ignore the trolls? {:-)
November 18th, 2007 at 2:24 pmSerial Troll on November 18, 2007 @ 2:26 pm: Off-Topic Troll Dung!
November 18th, 2007 at 2:38 pmit is getting cooler here in Washington state.
November 18th, 2007 at 2:41 pmComment by Billy Hill
That statement is definitely not true, you are deliberately confusing weather with climate. That is the easiest straw-man to debunk. It has been thirty years since I have studied climate and even back in those ancient times we used five, ten and twenty year moving averages, not year to year data.
troll buster: When I read your captured posts by the serial troll (Comment by troll buster — November 18, 2007 @ 2:17 pm), I thought, “We’ve got the dissembling little serial troll now.” I reported him for abuse, using ALL of your quotes for TP to compare with his duplicitous post on this thread.
Thank you.
November 18th, 2007 at 2:55 pmComment by hterrya — November 18, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
November 18th, 2007 at 3:03 pmGood work, if we all stick together we can clean up this site one troll at a time.
BH is a sick person and his type do not belong here. Here is a portion of a thread from last month where he thought he could get away with being witty at the expense of holocaust victims.
===============================================
Admittedly, Gray probably chose the Hitler comparison because just the mere mention of Hitler’s name evokes a rather incendiary reaction (which I’m sure was Gray’s goal.
Let’s not fall for the knee-jerk outrage triggers. That’s just what the right wants. There’s plenty of evidence to debate Gray’s global-warming position without that.
Comment by missmolly — October 15, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
#
a
But tell me, Billy Hill, how Adolph cared about global warming?
Comment by Xisithrus — October 15, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
I think he ordered catalytic converters installed on all of the furnaces.
Comment by Billy Hill — October 15, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
November 18th, 2007 at 3:29 pmI must admit that I often enjoy seeing the cyber-vandals (trolls) try to exercise their perverted intellect. The “environmental conscience” ploy is one of my favorites. The contradiction is simply astounding. When one, who’s only purpose is to disrupt, tries to engage in a real discussion I can’t help giggling.
November 18th, 2007 at 3:40 pmWhen one, who’s only purpose is to disrupt, tries to engage in a real discussion I can’t help giggling.
Comment by pete — November 18, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
After you finish giggling, please report the trolls for abuse. Their lack of intelligenc is often so “over the top” that they are humorous, but when they are fulfilling their purpose of disrupting the thread, they ain’t so funny, McGee!
November 18th, 2007 at 4:30 pm2 to three years?! We’re doomed!!!
November 18th, 2007 at 4:31 pmComment by hterrya — November 18, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
I report plenty of disruptive abuse from both sides of the political spectrum. However, it appears that weekends are light on moderators. Failing to have the really disgusting ones banished I like to point out their ability to discredit themselves. The BH troll is an interesting example. It tries to make it’s lies fly but, to any sapient being, it’s just humorous, or sad if you are one who feels compassion for the intellectually flawed.
I mean, it tries to paint a picture of a self reliant small business owner yet ignores the issues of rising fuel costs, collapsing construction market, or the hideous cost of health insurance for the self employed. I know many people in the business it claims to be in and these issues are very big. One old friend of mine had to lay off half his workers so he can afford to feed his family. If the troll had the faintest idea about it’s chosen subject it would realize how hollow it’s arguments are.
November 18th, 2007 at 4:43 pmIf the troll had the faintest idea about it’s chosen subject it would realize how hollow it’s arguments are.
Comment by pete — November 18, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
Then it wouldn’t be a troll. ;)
I think you have more influence on the “fence-sitters.”
November 18th, 2007 at 5:13 pmThen it wouldn’t be a troll. ;)
Comment by Zooey — November 18, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
True!
As for any attempt at influencing a troll? Not without a sack full of cash, “hard drugs”, or a cattle prod. Although the worst offenders can easily be reduced to an impotent state of rage.
November 18th, 2007 at 5:35 pmFind out when A Quiet Revolution is showing in your area.
To find out more, click the links below:
Flash Video
Link TV
November 19th, 2007 at 12:02 amholy BS..you people have been drinking the kool aid too long..anyways where is the reports but the scientific community downplaying GW..as we speak there are over 17000 reputable scientist and the like who disagree..you people are unreal..btw iu have a bridge to seel you..HAIL Y2K..HAIL 1975 ICE AGE..what about the dust bowl of the early 20th century oh yeah our fault..the arrogance that we can dictate what happens here when a major volcano or earthquake would wipe eveything …lemmings..sheep..cannot think on your own..gore is a menace how dare he get a Nobel..i guess Einstien is rolling in his grave…btw when they pass the greenhouse tax iam sure you will have the check already written and hand delivering it…geezz..
December 1st, 2007 at 6:18 pm