« Hippie Maniac Rebekah Johnson Pleads Not Guilty | Main | Slate Ridicules Its Own Enviro-idiocy »

At least they are trying to do something.

If you were successful enough to have diamond encrusted stuff - you wouldn't give a dime to anything.

At least they are trying to do something.

Yeah: sabotaging the cause they're ostensibly trying to support.

yeah lets try to stop global warming by making it thats brilliant derrrrrrp LOL

I like the article that said that Al Gore and all these dimbulb celebrities arriving at 'Live Earth' events in private jets was like people going to a 'Save the Whales' protest "in small vessels constructed of halved, rotting whale carcasses propelled by outboard motors."

If Al Gore can't give up his giant house and private jets to save the planet, why should I give up my SUV?

Wow - you are cynical - they know its a hoax?

They think its real because that is the conclusion of scientists.

You listen to right wing politicians too much.
This is a scientific issue not a political one.
Besides - when was the last time Dick Cheney shared his oil or no-bid halliburton profits with you?

You take a position that helps him make more and more millions - you are fools!!!!

The GOP counts on your stupidity - and boy they 've got you pegged.

G once again shows his numbskullery. Global warming is a scientific issue? not a political one? Then he brings up some stupidity about Dick Cheney? Why bring the VP into it if it's all about the science. ALgore after all is an immentent scientist who knows all there is to know about climatology, er no, on second thought he's a politician. Now I see G's point (it's on top of his head).

The socialists in the GOP got trounced this past election by conservatives who stiffed them so I wouldn't say they've got anyone pegged.

And to say this issue is scientific vs. political shows you're reality-challenged "G". That's the funniest thing I've read all week (thanks for the comic relief). When a washed-up bloated politician takes an "issue" and runs with it using flimsy arguments and questionable data coupled with $$ and sexy graphics then it's politics honey, not science. Get real.

The fact that you think it IS a political issue says all that needs to be said.

Scienctific fact does not change depending on your political ideology. This is exactly why we need to never elect far right wing ideologues [Bush and Cheney] to the WH again. They think everything is political.

Does your opinion re: the cause of Cancer and the best treatment depend on your political affiliation?

fellowes,

You are an extremist and therefore very much in the minority.

Maybe you can get in on the affirmative action bandwagon for those on the fringe.

Yeah, global warming is a serious problem and the only solution is to give vast amounts of power to politicians... but we're to believe there's absolutely no political agenda on the Gore side of the equation.

Lefties are bloody daft... even leaving out the fact that scientific sentiment is far from universal in siding with the ManBearPig cultists.

What you "G" and your ilk call "extremists" were once known as conservatives, the common sense crowd and Christians.

There are so many scientists worldwide having doubts about the "data", both in terms of collection and analysis that for you to ignore their thoughtful arguments is to dismiss intelligent discussion. The only extremist here is YOU. And for you to think that Bush, the NWO boy and his sidekick Cheney, the Lesbian-dad are right-wing extremists tells me you've drunk more cool-aid than Jim Jones ever dispensed. Do your part to cut down on emissions and drop dead.

>>>At least they are trying to do something.

Because what really counts is that you CARE, not that you actually accomplish any good! Yes, being "socialy aware" is a great thing because it puts you far above the stupid people who think you have to WORK to find solutions to problems instead of bringing attention to the problem!

Sure wish G would back up his claims with...something...anything.

Every now and then another lefty, terrorist-hugging troll shows up here, trying to put everyone in there place. The funny thing is they really, honestly think what they say matters.

G, you having a good time? Do you know that statistically conservatives give FAR more than liberals? Do you care? Do you care about anything at all besides posting annoying comments? Do you honestly think your complete insignificance is in any way altered by anything you do or say?

Bet you wish you could afford to move out of your mom's basement. Should we start a fund for you? a "Raise money for G to get a life" fund? You need some dough, man? College professor spent all his time ranting about the evils of America that he forgot to teach you any useful skills?

Too bad, maybe a rich, evil Republican will hire you.

Maybe 'G' is suggesting we all ought to follow Al Gore's example. So, let's all go out and buy gigantic houses and get our own private jets, then piously lecture people about their energy consumption... because then, "at least we'd be doing something."

Now, maybe I can't consume 20x the energy of an average American the way Al Gore does, but I am sure I can come up with some way to "do something."

Scienctific fact does not change depending on your political ideology.

Son, anthropogenic global warming isn't even within hailing distance of scientific fact. (Arguably, there's no such thing as a scientific fact, just hypotheses that have yet to be falsified). It's not even a hypothesis - it's a conjecture at this point.

Let me jumpstart the intellectual maturation process. What would you have to do to raise the temperature on your block by a single degree? Is that something you could do inadvertently, and not realize it?

And I'll move the process along further. What about the ozone layer? Don't hear much about it any more, do you? Yet the ozone layer is thinner than ever. => The original hysteria was just that: hysteria. Either that, or now we're all doomed, but just ignoring the problem.

And please, don't even think about giving me the crap about the consensus of scientists. Scientific issues are not decided by popular vote. William Thompson (Lord Kelvin), probably the greatest physicist of his generation, joined the scientific consensus when he scornfully dismissed the possibility of heavier than air flying machines and radio communication, not to mention misestimating the age of the earth by a factor of 1000 (owing to omitting heating from radioactive decay, which wasn't known at the time).

When hard data (not computer models, which are, after all, used everyday in Hollywood to produce science fiction) support the notion of anthropogenic global warming, then I'll consider it seriously. Until then, it's a climatological Y2K in my book.

NudeGayWhalesForJesus,

You are very kind but I live on the UES - an upscale neighborhood that is overwemingly democratic. I used to live in Evanston, IL - another upscale neighborhood that is very democratic.

I can back up any and everything I post.

Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation is once again - NOT political - it is biological - so why do you bring it up in the context of politics?

This is exactly the point I am making.

Maybe b/c according to right wing conservatives she is supposed to stay in the closet and live a shame based life or get married to a man and live a lie?

Welcome to a new world. Innate differences exist b/t people - get used to it. Your discomfort, fear, or whatever it is notwithstanding.

NudeGayWhalesForJesus,

You are very kind but I live on the UES - an upscale neighborhood that is overwemingly democratic. I used to live in Evanston, IL - another upscale neighborhood that is very democratic.

I can back up any and everything I post.

Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation is once again - NOT political - it is biological - so why do you bring it up in the context of politics?

This is exactly the point I am making.

Maybe b/c according to right wing conservatives she is supposed to stay in the closet and live a shame based life or get married to a man and live a lie?

Welcome to a new world. Innate differences exist b/t people - get used to it. Your discomfort, fear, or whatever it is notwithstanding.

NudeGayWhalesForJesus,

You are very kind but I live on the UES - an upscale neighborhood that is overwhelmingly Democratic. I used to live in Evanston, IL - another upscale neighborhood that is very Democratic.

I can back up any and everything I post.

Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation is once again - NOT political - it is biological - so why do you bring it up in the context of politics?

This is exactly the point I am making.

Maybe b/c according to right wing conservatives she is supposed to stay in the closet and live a shame based life or get married to a man and live a lie?

Welcome to a new world. Innate differences exist b/t people - get used to it. Your discomfort, fear, or whatever it is notwithstanding.

NudeGayWhalesForJesus - you claim I need to get a life - I found my purpose - to teach reactionary morons like you how to deal with reality - which includes an Independent or Democrat in the WH in 2008 - Yes!!!!

Do you want to recover from being a rigid, authoritarian, intolerant, irrational wingnut? Let me help! hehehehehe.

And I'll move the process along further. What about the ozone layer? Don't hear much about it any more, do you?

Jay, G may not be old enough to know about the big ozone scare. That was way, way back before even George W Bush was president, G. A young Left-wing Archie Bunker type, like our G, may have that era before his puberty all confused in his mind with the Civil War, Pangaea, Hiroshima, and Dinosaurs.

Kevin,

Archie Bunker was a right winger and a bigot [ooooppps - synonymous].

I am 45.

How can anyone in their right mind object to making efforts to ensure the planet is in good shape?

Unreal.

Or maybe you wingnuts will be beamed up to another planet someday [I hope].

Archie Bunker was a right winger and a bigot [ooooppps - synonymous]

G., do you have any idea what a bigoted thing that is to say? You really don't do you? If you're forty-five, I find that sad.

Kevin,

I find it sad too - where has all the time gone? Mid-life crisis is coming on.

How can anyone in their right mind object to making efforts to ensure the planet is in good shape?

This begs the question: is this an effective effort to ensure the planet is in good shape?

Suppose a group hysterically claimed that chanting over a dead cat was necessary to ensure the planet is in good shape. Your argument would apply equally well: some think that the effort is necessary to ensure the planet is in good shape, while others (and I certainly hope we'd count you among us on this one) would doubt that very much. ("But at least they're trying to do something!" Sheesh.)

So making efforts to ensure the planet is in good shape is not the issue. Whether the proposed efforts fall into that class IS the issue.

Now chanting over a dead cat is a harmless enough undertaking, albeit a bit whiffy for those foolish enough to be downwind. Trashing the world's most productive economy, and the engine of world economic growth, on the other hand, requires a very high standard of proof indeed.

It's like saying a booboo on your wrist may be melanoma, we better amputate your arm to ensure you're in good shape. The proposed course of action is drastic in light of the likelihood that the problem is that severe, and still less in light of the likelihood that the problem may not exist at all, and (in this case) that the proposed drastic action may have no influence on it in any case.

Jay Guevara,

Got you. Good point.

My point is you have to acknowledge that there is an issue before you can even begin to fix it.

The Bush admin. has refused to acknowledge that there is an issue.

Poor leadership

[Trashing the world's most productive economy, and the engine of world economic growth, on the other hand, requires a very high standard of proof indeed.]

Who wants to do anything to hurt the economy?

There are ways of protecting the environment and not only NOT hurting the economy but stimulating it.

These are far from mutually exclusive.

I do however appreciate your insight and intelligent reponse which is a far cry from others on here.

You can tell an AGW ideologue by their arguments, which are invariably:

1) The debate is over.
2) All scientists agree.
3) Anyone who disagrees is dishonest or a fool.

What they never, ever do is actually discuss the science. They swear that the science supports AGW, but they won't debate the details. They don't seem to have a clue that climate research is an extraordinarily large, complicated, and sometimes contradictory branch of science.

I have a science background and I've been following the debate for a couple of years. I have grown convinced that it is one of the biggest scams of the last century. Do some reading. There are lots of interesting sites on the web with compelling arguments against AGW. I could provide dozens of links, if I thought you would go to them.

One striking observation from all of my reading is that the people who peddle AGW the most vigorously are politicians, actors, pop musicians, journalists (and I use that term loosely), etc.. The most visible people disputing AGW are almost always ... surprise ... scientists! And not entomologists or psychologists, but weather and climate scientists with credentials and an in-depth knowledge of the subject. Aside from the overwhelming arguments against AGW, this fact should speak volumes.

Really, do some reading. You owe it to your fellow man.

By the way, I find it hard to believe that you don't see how dramatically reducing carbon emissions could impact the economy, given that nearly all of the man-made CO2 comes from power generation. Where do you think all of that power goes?

I couldn't help but laugh; 'G' calling other people "wingnuts".

HA! The irony! (HA! The stupidity!)

Jimbo,

Chickenhawk draft dodgers and religious fundies [your "base"] are nuts!!!

I don't have a "base", dipwad.

G, thank you for your reasoned and temperate response.

Ok - the GOP "Base"

Jay - sarcasm alienates people. I thought more of you.

G, I wasn't being sarcastic. My comment was entirely sincere.

Forget it, Jay. G is being a fiesty little bitch today.

Jay,

Sorry about that.

Crush Liberalism thinks that b/c I am gay that I am weak or feminine - far from the truth.
But it most likely makes him feel better thinking that he has all the answers.