Of course I am a guys who also tends to ignore scientists who have been bought and paid for by the tobacco lobby, you know, like Richard Lindzen.

I wouldn’t call being the last country in the world to take this problem seriously exactly “Rushing into it.”

Of course, I am not a guy who also tends to ignore scientists who have been bought and paid for by the tobacco lobby, you know, like Richard Lindzen.

You can be sure O (”Obtuse”?) Bigfoot will be back with more stupid questions, stupid comments and, in general, stupidity.

Because he (like many of his stupid ilk) is too stupid to believe what the scientists, who are far smarter than he could ever be even in his most fevered dreams, have been saying and saying and saying.

Also, he is a d*ckhead.

There is no such thing as “being free from restriction or control.”. That is a myth.

People do not have the “liberty” to murder, rob, rape, nor the “liberty” to burn down your neighbors house.

We are polluting the planet, and altering it’s chemistry in such a way as to adversly affect it’s ability to provide habitation for our descendents.

And your argument is that you want the “liberty” to keep doing that?

Ok, then will you grant me the “liberty” to burn down your house? Because that is the personal equivalent, it’s making your home unihabitable.

Comment by toasterhead — December 6, 2007 @ 12:03 am

I was letting ralph the wonder llama know how he did. That would be for him for his stirring performance.

Actually, billions of people ened to change their ways because the majority of the people who have actually studied global climate change, as opposed to the insides of their own backsides, say that the world’s population is damaging its own chances of survival.

Any other stupid questions?

No. Billions of people need to change their ways because it is in their self-interest.

Comment by Bluedahlia — December 5, 2007 @ 9:43 pm

Did- did you just give science the Brubaker?

There is a downside to blindly accepting global warming ideology. Liberties will be impacted, regardless of the legitimacy of the claims.

Global climate change is not an ideology. It is scientific fact.

By your definition, any form of government regulation constitutes a loss of liberty. I think there are times when individual liberty is enhanced by thoughtful government policy. When government cracks down on violent crime, ordinary citizens have the liberty to walk safely through the streets of their neighborhoods. When government punishes polluters, it enhances our freedom to enjoy the natural world. When government cracks down on greenhouse gas emissions, we become free from the tyranny of a fossil fuel economy and free to appreciate the biodiversity that we currently have on this planet. The “liberty” to continue releasing greenhouse gases is a totally false formulation–a red herring. I do not want the “freedom” to reduce the planet’s biodiversity by 40-70%, and I believe it’s wise policy to do what we can to avoid it.

See 200 hundred scientists on one hand; one crackpot on the other — seems fair and balanced doesn’t it? This is called journalism in 2007.

Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 5, 2007 @ 10:06 pm

Liberties are not the same as liberty, morontastic. You, for instance, constantly take liberties with the truth.

Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 5, 2007 @ 10:06 pm

Having a planetary surface even 5 degrees higher and starting to resemble Venus will also curtail Liberties.

The ones who should be regulated by We The People are the corporations that have one thing only on their minds, regardless of the consequences……Profits.

But you guys don’t care if my phone gets tapped, so why do you care about this? It’s all about defense of the nation there guy. Relax.

This obviously proves they’re all on the take. They want to get rich on GW hysteria in a hurry, before the VAST MAJORITY of REAL scientists speak out and expose their fraud.

(How’d I do?)