Comments (29) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   Delawarebob said, 4 months ago

   ANandy, you must be confusing your fantasy with fact …

2. 

   tpenna said, 4 months ago

   Oy! ANandy is going on record as joining the 212 in rejecting the vast majority of scientists who confirm anthropogenic climate change.

3. 

   wittyvegan said, 4 months ago

   Why am I not surprised that ANandy doesn’t believe in global warming. He has never been big on facts.

   Here is a nice link explaining the politics behind the vote: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2009/Senate/Maps/Jun29-s.html#1

4. 

   iamthelorax said, 4 months ago

   There may be a consensus amongst people that scientists have a consensus on global warming, but that does not make it so….and even then, you need to be careful about who you trust.

   People need to wake up about the fact that global warming is now an easy ticket for scientists to get their grant money.

   There are as many crooked profiteers pushing global warming money as there are pushing money against it (if not more).

   Just because Al Gore told you the thinking is finished and it’s time to follow his advice doesn’t mean you have to do it.

   The planet’s temperatures go up and down all the time. Meteorologists not only disapprove of the data model climatologists used, they don’t believe you can accurately predict the weather so far in the future.

   Climatologists may be in a position to measure the outcome of rising temperatures, but they are unqualified to tell us exactly why it’s happened and, and they are not able to offer solutions in such a God-like manner that we mortals must obey or die.

5. 

   Gary Kleppe said, 4 months ago

   Actually, some Congress members rejected the bill because it was loaded up with corporate welfare and didn’t do nearly enough to fight global warming. See here for example: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Kucinich–Passing-a-weak-by-Dennis-Kucinich-090626-786.html

6. 

   HOWGOZIT said, 4 months ago

   The bill is a joke–just like those that voted for it. Let’s all post sites of the biased in favor. Majority of scientists–meaning the majority getting in the news are those claiming there is global warming. Funny how it has been in the mid to high nineties here the past couple weeks, the record highs were all back in the 1913-1915 times.

7. 

   leezerd said, 4 months ago

   lorax - so we are just stay the course? why not slow down and make sure of the best path. If we continue ahead at the same rate and find out that the climatologists were right we will be unable to do anything about it. Slowing down is not a bad way to go.
   I worry that people will put more faith in Meterologists (who use models that can’t predict the weather change tomorrow) than is warranted.

8. 

   tpenna said, 4 months ago

   HOWGOZIT said “Majority of scientists–meaning the majority getting in the news”.

   That actually made me chuckle a little. In truth, the news makes it look like there is even a serious debate within the scientific community. The only debate regards degrees, not whether global climate change exists or we have influenced it. But television news presents the “debate” as though the two sides are on equal footing.

9. 

   harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

   The sky is falling. It will be another ice age..No the earth is heating up! No Ice. Hey anyone know what the weather will be for Christmas? Really any one of these experts can tell me?

10. 

    GNWachs said, 4 months ago

    The USA will spend $billions to help fight global warming by cutting back our jobs and manufacturing. Neither China nor India will follow our lead so the end result- just as much global warming but we will have fewer jobs and import our needed materials from China and japan. Yep, those 219 were brilliant.

11. 

    dtroutma said, 4 months ago

    Considering I’ve studied the problem in the field, with “scientists” who actually have proofs, and I.Q.s higher than a razor clam, and taken part in some of the studies, it IS important to recognize Al Gore is NOT the expert. He is just the convenient political target for those with I.Q.s lower than razor clams. I guess that’s their break point on intellect?

    And while the U.K. (stricter emission standards), and even China(largest producers now of wind turbines), are looking at more options- we are indeed there with the ostriches.

    As to “cost”? “Pay me now or pay me later” doesn’t apply, if there is nothing left later. The real cost will be born after our current population is dead, so who cares about posterity????

12. 

    TrickyPickle said, 4 months ago

    Regardless of the cause, the earth is warming. Climate is changing. There will be repercussions. Some we can predict, some we can’t and some we’re fuzzy on. Who cares if we caused it? The question should be what do we do about it. Some listed items, like renewable energies, have benefits to us regardless of their effect on climate change. Cleaner air and less dependency on foreign supplies for example. Why not pursue win-win avenues like this anyway?

13. 

    tpenna said, 4 months ago

    Hi Tricky. I would agree with you except for the fact that one’s idea of a solution frequently hinges on where one pins the blame. A person who believes that humans are the cause is more likely to be interested in changing human behavior.

    Most environmental changes do make economic sense, as you point out. But there are some externalities that, if accounted for, would have bad economic effects.

14. 

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    Many environmental economic benefits are long term. Short term, they cost. How many people are short sighted? If you want to get people together on these issues you need to create short term economic advantages. ( or penalties)

15. 

    tpenna said, 4 months ago

    Gladius’s point is well made. Unfortunately, the markets provide vast incentives for short-sightedness. If you own a company, you’d better not save up for a rainy day, or you’ll be the target of a leveraged buyout. And nothing spells botom line quite like the quarterly numbers. Ten-year projections, be damned!

16. 

    NoFearPup said, 4 months ago

    ^^TOP - Facts are in the eye of the beholder, apparently. Since this is a crap-shoot, I’ll put my money one one-half degree rise in global temp for the decade of the 90’s does not constitute “Global Warming”. If I’m wrong, maybe New Orleans gets six more inches of precip during the next hurricane…

17. 

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    I’m sure we really want to start a trade war with China.
    (Riiiiiiiight)

18. 

    harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

    Here is my problem I hear alot of we need this to save the world or we have to act now or Regardless of the cause, the earth is warming. Climate is changing.
    1st off the Earth is not warming it has been cooling for the last 11 years! the simplest cause I can see is that the SUN is in a non active cycle. If you take that into account it points to another ice age and not warming!
    But no we need to spend trillions on CO2 that makes up only 0.038% of our air. In which we as humans might effect a hole 0.04% of that!
    But we must do something something so feel better.
    Can any one tell me what the weather will be like on Christmas? I mean we should be able to predict that now can we not?

19. 

    DrCanuck said, 4 months ago

    HQ asks: Can any one tell me what the weather will be like on Christmas? I mean we should be able to predict that now can we not?

    DrCanuck responds: I can. It will be cooler than today. Probably by a lot.

    (And your other problem is that you also don’t know that there is no such word as “alot.”)

20. 

    sclark55 said, 4 months ago

    2 facts clinched it for me, and I wonder if anybody can rebut: 1. The guy who founded the Weather Channel says global warming is a hoax and 2. he knows people who have been told that their findings must support man-made global warming to get funding.
    Follow the money - and the political power - global warming isn’t man-made, but taxes and regulations are.

21. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    Why do the righties hate our planet so much?

    It must be the fundie christian influence…telling them that it doesn’t matter what we do to the planet, because we’ll all be leaving it soon.

    Just another example of them forcing their religion on everyone else.

22. 

    DrCanuck said, 4 months ago

    sclark, if that’s a serious question, I’ll give it a serious answer; if it’s rhetorical and you’ve already made up your mind, ignore the following.

    The guy who founded the Weather Channel is a business man whose purpose is to make money selling advertising in the entertainment industry. Not a scientific or reputable source.

    The second is simply rumour, unsubstantiated. Not reputable.

    As a scientist of many years, I can tell you that funding doesn’t work that way: funding agencies fund independent research based on the validity of the proposed design, BEFORE any results are found. Nobody does real research and then tries to “sell” the results; doesn’t work that way. Most research supporting global warming was done this way; independently, funding before results.

    On the other hand, oil, gas, and coal companies have offered cash payments to anyone who can present data contradicting global warming. Several people “found” such data. Religious groups have done the same.

    So you’re right: following the money and the political power, and it’ll lead you right to the oil and coal companies.

23. 

    motivemagus said, 4 months ago

    I don’t consider the Wall Street Journal an unbiased source on this…and you want to talk expense? Check out what happens when the Midwest becomes a dust bowl, droughts continue to get worse (as they have for the past ten years) and every major American city on the water starts going under water without dikes…

24. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    I ask again: Why do the righties want all that to happen, Motive?

25. 

    Liberty_Mill said, 4 months ago

    Righties are afraid they might have to admit this is it - this life, this planet, these people - we are here and no one out there is going to save us. They believe a god will come to their rescue so they are absolved from all responsibility for what destruction they cause here; they can act with impunity and disregard for the planet and the other humans that inhabit it because they are certain there is something ‘better’ for them post-death. If climate change is real and we are responsible for the quality of life in our communities in general, it threatens their weak superficial idea of faith.

26. 

    harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

    And I guess only lefty can tax us to save us from us and cow farts? Motive you are taking about the water cycle. CO2 is only the big thing because they have this computer model. Hey I wonder what happens if we double the 0.038% of the CO2 in this model. and what do you know the temp went up slightly. And the famous debunked hockey stick graph was born.
    Nay we can not put the sun cycles into this model.
    Ten years ago we were to burn and the seas would rise. BS I was just at the beach and high tide was the same as it was 10 years ago. shoot you can go online right now and see the tide charts. Now that is predictable science.

27. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    Liberty Mill nailed it.

    And Harley once again proves his cluelessness.

28. 

    harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

    Hey Andy what is the weather going to be like on Christmas, I would really like to know I have plans and all?
    Hey non human this cap and trade is being forced down our throat in the name of CO2 . It has NOTHING to do with whether or not we are good stewards to our land. The extra 300 pages that was put in the bill in the late night is all about whoes pocket our tax money is going to. Nothing more.
    If I thought for one moment this cap and trade BS would help I would be all for it. But you guys have been sold a bill of goods and the pee under the cup is now off the table!

29. 

    motivemagus said, 4 months ago

    Harley, quit repeating yourself - it’s not helping. Global climate change includes a host of things, some of which are almost certainly driven by human behavior. It’s not just CO2; that’s just the commonest. Methane is far worse. One of the fears, in fact, is that melting arctic ice will release methane.
    I haven’t read the bill, so can’t comment in detail.
    
    We have to do something, if we don’t want to destroy the global economy.