What do you think about those attempting to use ignorance to convince themselves that there are no threats . . . except from government and science. Actually my carbon signature is very small. I heat and cool a small, insulated house with clean natural gas and natural gas/nuclear generated electricity. I drive a very short 10-minute commute. I recycle all of my recyclable material. Most importantly I planted and own over 100,000 trees that are consuming carbon dioxide and producing oxygen to compensate for my small carbon signature. I'm probably overall carbon-negative.
That's great red! I can disagree with you and still respect your opinion. As I've said many times before...the biggest problem with the global warming debate is that the people who talk the most (Gore, Democrats, Obama) have no credibility to me and are some of the biggest abusers on the planet. How are we expected to believe anything these hypocrites say? I'm all for recycling, keeping the planet clean, and not wasting natural resources. I just don't believe that temperatures are rising as a result of what America has done in the last 30 years. I definitely don't buy into the biased argument the world is in peril due to eight years of the Bush administration. Another stupid attack from idiotic Democrits. I applaud you for your efforts but if you truly believe we're headed for doom, shouldn't you forego wasting time here on this forum and do even more? Couldn't you condemn Pelosi for flying across the country in a huge jet? Maybe you could protest the Hollywood liberals when they all show up in limos for the Academy awards. I would just like to see those who believe in global warming first focus their efforts on those who "claim" to support the theory but don't actually practice what they preach. After forcing the Gore's and Pelosi's of the world to ride bicycles and live in tents, feel free to turn your attention to those of us who have our doubts. Until then I'll consider this to simply be a hoax designed to steal taxpayer money to be used for personal interests. Sorry!...but people should get their own house in order before telling someone else how they should live and act.
science is not a threat. science is simply a method of obtaining information. if red believes science, thats fine, he plants trees and saves energy. good for him. the problem is when politicians realize they can get involved with science. when the uinited nations forms an intergovernmental panel on something and starts influencing opinion, you can go ahead and forget knowing anything real about that topic. science must be independent, never connected to government, never a tool for legislating and manipulating folks.
Are we still talking about global warming or are you referring to the liberals and their thoughts on terrorism? :grin:
I've never said that we're headed for "doom". It serves no purpose to exaggerate. But we are going to be impacted and already we have been. Sea level is rising, agricultural patterns are changing, hurricanes are more numerous and stronger. That's your silly politics, not mine. You're dreamin', amigo. We don't have to convince the believers. We have to convince the deniers. No, you shall have to go to Hollywood and protest yourself.
you probably already realize this, but just to be sure, 99% (and probably higher) of the science done in the US (and probably the world) is either conducted by a govt agency or paid in part by taxes.
i know lots of scientists. engineers and chemists mostly. none of them work for the government. they work for companies like dupont and exxon and pepsi and reynolds and starbucks and PPG. they are making products to improve our lives, not trying to write up reports to manipulate politicians. where are you getting this statistic? i am aware that public universities do plenty of work in science. and there are fellas with nasa and the miltary making rockets and whatever. that doesnt account for 99%. and science would be better off if the percent was less than whatever it is. most sciences that do not have a marketable purpose are useless. like climate science.
Sorry to hear that. I guess it's not really that important of an issue to you after all. I don't think you've got a prayer of "convincing" people with that attitude. You don't have to worry though...the same party who cried the blues about the lack of bi-partisanship is quickly learning that this administration will support any effort to cram their agenda down our collective throat regardless of the cost or long-term implications. It just amazes me how this administration (and their followers) who absolutely hate what they consider the "rich" (people who actually work and earn a living) have no problem with their leaders using enormous amounts of energy but somehow justify those "carbon footprints" while condemning the average family for driving a SUV or using their A/C. Can you say...DOUBLE STANDARD? :nope:
scientists say that the future of human civilization is at risk. red apparently doesnt trust science. neither do i.
