Tom Toles by Tom Toles

Tom Toles

Comments (36) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. PianoGuy24

    PianoGuy24 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Obama saying we’re getting serious on climate change is code for: We need more money from these suckers….er, taxpayers.

  2. ReFlex-76

    ReFlex-76 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    “Obama saying we’re getting serious on climate change is code for: We need more money from these suckers….er, taxpayers.”
    .
    - Right, it’s not like massive tornadoes just hit Oklahoma; oh, wait . . .
    .
    - Ummm, it’s not like Alberta is getting horribly flooded; oh, wait . . .
    .
    - It’s not like we can literally see the ocean rising; oh, wait . . .
    .
    - Anyway, about damn time; hopefully it’s not too late.

  3. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 said, over 1 year ago

    The human made changing climate will work in the favor of the Plutocrats who want fascist kind of govt. With them at the helm of course as they have wanted for a century or more.

  4. Doughfoot

    Doughfoot said, over 1 year ago

    @PianoGuy24

    “Fewer taxes, less government” is code for “I’ve got mine, screw everybody else.” Talk about suckers.

  5. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, over 1 year ago

    President Obama gives beautiful speeches. (Unlike some former Presidents I could name.) His ‘we must stop climate change’ speech seems to be that, starting in 2017, we REALLY need to start reducing carbon. (But not before, of course, so we won’t hurt the US economy while he’s still president).


    Of course, there are provisions to delay that 2017 start if it’s a problem. Until say 2117? 2217? 3017?

  6. richardelguru

    richardelguru GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    onguard You’d be better posting a picture of yourself

  7. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @onguard

    ain’t it the truth. I have solar panels as well …though my truck is not appetite lite … i only drive when the trip is over 3 miles. since I live within walking distance of everything I need…..

    I wonder how one would control the effect of the sun?

  8. PianoGuy24

    PianoGuy24 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @Reflex-76
    Hmmm, maybe you’re right. Tornados never existed before massive industrial progress that would’ve SURELY resulted in climate change. Before that the weather was ALWAYS ideal and perfect….oh, wait….
    http://nation.time.com/2013/05/21/10-deadliest-tornadoes-in-u-s-history/

  9. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Before he got elected he told us he wanted gas to be above 5$ a gallon for our own good. Once elected He told us history will point to this time when the seas stopped rising. Then Obama does all he can to battle the demon CO2. If You idiot voters who voted for him did not know he would do all he could to bow down to the green weenies who only want to punish bad man for hurting mother Nature… now pay at the door. Then you got what you deserved, like bankrupt power plants and middle east oil.
    Hey Obama where are all the magic green jobs you promised. You planted your magic green beans in Detroit and the jobs came up in China.

  10. WaitingMan

    WaitingMan said, over 1 year ago

    The hundred-year storms are coming every year now. But climate change is a hoax. Classic right-wing logic. And “The Flintstones” was a documentary.

  11. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 1 year ago

    @onguard

    First: even if you were right (and the sun does contribute to climate change, obviously, as any moron knew already), that does NOT mean we can ignore it. There are already dramatic changes happening that could transform our civilization, ranging from shifts in soil fertility and rainfall to geopolitical dynamics changing due to the melting ice cap.
    Second: you are wrong. Humans have made tremendous differences to the environment; several of them contribute to global warming, e.g., record-breaking levels of CO2, increased methane from breeding cattle for food, chopping down forests that previously absorbed CO2, etc., etc., etc.
    I find it odd that you think posting a picture of the sun is, I don’t know, a clever retort of some kind? The whole point of the greenhouse effect is that it captures solar energy and keeps the heat to a higher degree. No one — NO ONE — misses this point. So citing it is somewhat like saying “oh, yeah? Well, two plus two equals four! So there!”
    We get it. Move on to the second grade.

  12. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 1 year ago

    @me9970

    Now that is an interesting question. The answer is no, for two reasons:
    1. Mars gets much less sunlight than Earth – a little over one-third (one estimate I saw was 36%), though because less sunlight is scattered, the practical brightness is about half of Earth’s.
    2. The atmosphere is too thin to retain the heat. (Barometric pressure of 6.8 millibars to 10.8 millibars estimated on Mars contrasted to around 1000 millibars on Earth.) It leaks away.
    One could argue that the reason that Mars is relatively warm as the Solar System goes (-116 to 32 degrees F) is because the CO2 helps a little heat stay behind!

  13. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, about 1 year ago

    @me9970

    The atmosphere of Mars is also only about 1% (if that much) of the atmosphere of the Earth, which is also some 50% closer to the sun. And the atmosphere of the Earth is only a fraction of that of Venus, which is far closer to the sun than the Earth is, and through its own form of CO2 (and other gasses) global warming, has a surface temperature in the hundreds of degrees Fahrenheit. So, your point is not only unscientific, it is also totally illogical, and therefore is not worth posting in the first place. Hopefully you were just posting out of the general ignorance of science that most testing is now showing many average Americans to have, and not the kind of malice towards science and scientists that I sometimes see here!!

  14. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, about 1 year ago

    @me9970

    You ignorance of the state of California (with the ONLY economy that generates over $2 trillion dollars of GDP of all of the states of the union) is only exceeded by your ignorance of both science, and even simple logic!!!!

  15. Quipss

    Quipss said, about 1 year ago

    @ypoons7666

    Believe it or not China may very well end up being a leader. 1 new coal plant per week may be true, as well as most rivers there being far too polluted to swim in, however it is still dumping money into green investments and is right now on track to reach peak carbon emissions by 2030 and see reductions by 2050. I find to expect much more to be irrational for an industrializing country. In developed countries however we have accumulated massive amounts of capital, unfortunately due to lack of exponential growth ( we grow at about same amount as China per person, Population # and actual rate accounted for) Investments tend to go into other countries understandably looking to better payout.
    ************************************************
    This would signal a need for financial reform that deals with a non exponential economy, preferably by long term investments, renewable energy combined with near autonomous factories is a possibility for long yield productivity growth, however it would reduce need for jobs, this itself should be a good thing. However due to the nature of people needing jobs it is not. A possibility would be more holidays, shorter work weeks. so forth. While our labor conditions aren’t draconian and 40 hours isn’t slavery it still would prove to be more practical and beneficial on the whole to utilize lack of need for work as lack of need for work, rather than characterizing it as lack of being economic competitive.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (21).