What most commentators—and many scientists—seem to miss is that the only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes.
- Richard S. Linzen, professor of meteorology, MIT
Monday, April 09, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Why do neocons refuse to even enter the mainstream debate about global warming?
Why do neocons immediately resort to ridicule, name-calling, and petty partisanship?
Why are neocons so terrified of this topic?
99% of the world's scientists agree that climate change is an ongoing phenomena, and 99% of those 99% agree it's human influenced.
The neocons side with the 1% of the crackpots.
Good heavens, I keep having to remind myself that neocons run this country.
How terrifying is that?
I am interested in a debate on global warming.
Cite me some data. Then we will debate it.
99% of scientists do not agree with the liberal version of global warming/climate change. This is another liberal lie. As the MIT professor pointed out, climate change is the norm.
Liberals want to use the issue of global warming to bully people into going along with higher taxes and more government control as a way to advance the cause of liberalism.
What mainstream debate?
It is a one sided lecture with policy dictates attached.
Why don't the liberals consider that they may be over reaching and indeed that the latest minor temperature changes may be more historically normal, and maybe their solutions are worse than the problem demands?
I'd say there is room in the middle for "debate", but since the left insists it is all already settled, we on the right may as well stay as far away from their "settlement" as possible.
My prediction -- ten years from now the global warming craze has diminished into nothing, just as their ice age craze of the 1970s melted away.
If we are "terrified" it is because of the destruction to the world economy the left wants to impose. That and the hypocracy of advocates like the Goracle.
Let's rank the biggest threats to our future:
1. Islamism
2. Communism/Socialism
3. Nuclear Terrorists
4. Hmmm, nothing else compares.
Let's stay focused on the threats that we know are there.
My list is a little different:
1) Liberalism
2) Islamofascism
3) Communism/Socialism
4) Nuclear Terrorists
Why liberalism as Number One?
Because they, with malice aforethought, would reduce our ability to defend ourselves against the next three items on the list.
You think I am joking?
Look at what people like Jimmy Carter, Frank Church, and Stansfield Turner did to our intelligence infrastructure.
They dismantled in a few short months what took us decades to build.
I see your point, but if it were not for the other three, liberalism wouldn't bother me so much.
We could just argue over tax rates and abortion, but all the while our safety and security would not be in peril.
I have many liberal friends and relatives. Fine, that's America.
I don't forget I was once a liberal. I know how and why it happens.
So, I left liberalism off my list, but I agree they are not helping with the other threats, and often are working in their interests.
Oh well.
Post a Comment