Eh, the science – the REAL science – actually says that it IS a hoax. But if the science is wrong. . . Everybody dies. So, upsides vs. downsides. . . We kinda need to change our ways.
Very sadly, the folks mostly hurting us are the third world countries. Who are doing exactly what WE did a hundred years ago. So saving us is kinda like holding their heads under water. Huh. Well, we’re bigger than they are. (That was a JOKE, you dumb fools!) (Grin)
@Chris: But since we know better now, why should the Thirld World countries be denies better technologies and forced to make the same mistakes we did? This is ridiculous, we’re all on the same planet, national boundaries don’t count.
Regardless of the pretty settled science about AGW why are so many folks so knee-jerkingly opposed to conservation and energy independence which makes so much sense in terms of fiscal and national security policy? Maybe instead of sending all of our money abroad to people who want to kill us and then bombing the others who hate us, and then paying to rebuild their bombed out infrastructure we could spend those billions here on domestic energy jobs and mass transit infrastructure. Bombing the terrorists doesn’t piss them off, when we stop having to buy their oil, that will really piss them off.
Oh, but Julian, the easy solution – easier by very far – is burning coal. And burning forests. And cutting down forests. And growing cows. And. . . doing things that hurt the planet. I wish that weren’t true.
Nuke energy is the solution, but the eco-freaks hate it. Solar has not yet proven to provide more energy than it takes to create (a REALLY cool fact!). Wind is iffy. Wave is kind of iffy, too. Fusion is the true solution, but it hasn’t happened for more than miliseconds, yet.
It gets rid of garbage, produces more energy than it uses, and it produces only two products: hydrogen that can be used as fuel and an inert powder that can be used to make bricks and ceramics.
I know the US, Canada and Japan have them already.
Yes a better world. A world where the poor cant heat there homes. Noboby is more self-righteous then an environmentalist.
I agree-extremely naive to think that those who claim to be helping the environment will be using our tax dollars to do anything but get richer.
“Eh, the science – the REAL science – actually says that it IS a hoax”
Real biased science?
Are you an expert? No? Maybe that’s why world governments listen to scientists instead of the American right wing minority.
Do you know who stalled global warming talks at Copenhagen in order to avoid any legislation, to the despair of other world leaders, including conservative ones? Your friend China.
That’s right. Why should we create a better world? Our children be dammed!
That’s right. Why should we create a better world? Our children be damned!
I’m all for a nice environment. But the people pushing the “green” agenda are the ones saying that the average american is the offender, and not the companies that are dumping filth… and certainly not the third world who is expanding without ANY controls. So americans accept a lower standard of living, while the pollution gets worse. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Nice.
From the NZ Herald: “Dirty brown clouds created by millions of cooking fires in Asia contribute as much to global warming as greenhouse gas emissions, say scientists.”
and you bet Pope Al will still get rich off this
Eh, the science – the REAL science – actually says that it IS a hoax. But if the science is wrong. . . Everybody dies. So, upsides vs. downsides. . . We kinda need to change our ways.
Very sadly, the folks mostly hurting us are the third world countries. Who are doing exactly what WE did a hundred years ago. So saving us is kinda like holding their heads under water. Huh. Well, we’re bigger than they are. (That was a JOKE, you dumb fools!) (Grin)
@Chris: But since we know better now, why should the Thirld World countries be denies better technologies and forced to make the same mistakes we did? This is ridiculous, we’re all on the same planet, national boundaries don’t count.
Regardless of the pretty settled science about AGW why are so many folks so knee-jerkingly opposed to conservation and energy independence which makes so much sense in terms of fiscal and national security policy? Maybe instead of sending all of our money abroad to people who want to kill us and then bombing the others who hate us, and then paying to rebuild their bombed out infrastructure we could spend those billions here on domestic energy jobs and mass transit infrastructure. Bombing the terrorists doesn’t piss them off, when we stop having to buy their oil, that will really piss them off.
Oh, but Julian, the easy solution – easier by very far – is burning coal. And burning forests. And cutting down forests. And growing cows. And. . . doing things that hurt the planet. I wish that weren’t true.
Nuke energy is the solution, but the eco-freaks hate it. Solar has not yet proven to provide more energy than it takes to create (a REALLY cool fact!). Wind is iffy. Wave is kind of iffy, too. Fusion is the true solution, but it hasn’t happened for more than miliseconds, yet.
I’m interested in gas plasmification.
http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2007-03/prophet-garbage
It gets rid of garbage, produces more energy than it uses, and it produces only two products: hydrogen that can be used as fuel and an inert powder that can be used to make bricks and ceramics.
I know the US, Canada and Japan have them already.
Yes a better world. A world where the poor cant heat there homes. Noboby is more self-righteous then an environmentalist.
I agree-extremely naive to think that those who claim to be helping the environment will be using our tax dollars to do anything but get richer.
“Eh, the science – the REAL science – actually says that it IS a hoax”
Real biased science?
Are you an expert? No? Maybe that’s why world governments listen to scientists instead of the American right wing minority.
Do you know who stalled global warming talks at Copenhagen in order to avoid any legislation, to the despair of other world leaders, including conservative ones? Your friend China.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/22/copenhagen-climate-change-mark-lynas
That’s right. Why should we create a better world? Our children be dammed!
That’s right. Why should we create a better world? Our children be damned!
I’m all for a nice environment. But the people pushing the “green” agenda are the ones saying that the average american is the offender, and not the companies that are dumping filth… and certainly not the third world who is expanding without ANY controls. So americans accept a lower standard of living, while the pollution gets worse. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Nice.
From the NZ Herald: “Dirty brown clouds created by millions of cooking fires in Asia contribute as much to global warming as greenhouse gas emissions, say scientists.”
Reduce gas emissions, kill the cows…