Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
66 days ago.
by slinky
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

harryanderson

You mean the question about profits? What was that again?

Also, you haven't answered my question, which only requires a simple yes or no. That's ok, though. It shows how we are different.

Posted 629 days ago.

harryanderson

One of mine? I wouldn't call someone an idiot. That's your style, not mine.

Posted 629 days ago.

JoeBlow

Ohw - you seem to contribute a lot to this conversation. Can you give me some examples of incorrect statments by Fox?

Posted 629 days ago.

harryanderson

Yes, Ithink. Oil has lots so uses. I think future generations will find more wonderful uses for it, and we should save a generous supply for them.

That's why I think it's too valuable to burn up by driving into Spencer for a Big Mac.

Posted 629 days ago.

Show me where you found the definition of Faux= Fox. Your mind is not a reference resource for us readers.

Why shouldn't the oil companies make a profit? When you lefties get them all put out of business, where will you get all the multitude of products that are made mainly from by products of oil?

That includes medical devices, medicine, telephones, cars, and dozens of other things we use daily.

Plastic is necessary in this world we live in today.

Posted 629 days ago.

Ohweirdone, you keep asking stupid stuff. Speak English. Faux is a French word that has no meaning as you use it. I'm sure Tiredofit has heard the wind blow before.

Posted 630 days ago.

harryanderson

Do you agree that fossil fuel users should pay all the costs associated with using it?

Posted 630 days ago.

Kendall78

But again I will ask a question that relies on your opinion....what would you consider to be "proof" in this argument?

You won't accept academic findings, govt findings or even business findings. You won't believe personal research on here either.

So what would you consider to be proof?

Posted 630 days ago.

Kendall78

But again I will ask a question that relies on your opinion....what would you consider to be "proof" in this argument?

You won't accept academic findings, govt findings or even business findings. You won't believe personal research on here either.

So what would you consider to be proof?

Posted 630 days ago.

Kendall78

Tired, are you even able to answer a simple yes or no question with a "yes" or "no"?

I ask because Harry and many other try to bring down the question to your intellectual level but you still go way off tangent.

Posted 630 days ago.

harryanderson

Do you agree fossil fuel users should pay all the costs associated with using it? It's a simple yes or no question.

Posted 630 days ago.

harryanderson

Do you agree that fossil fuel users should pay all the costs associated with using it?

Posted 630 days ago.

harryanderson

And that's something I favor: forcing fossil fuels to pay all the costs associated with their extraction and burning.

Posted 630 days ago.

harryanderson

Quite right, Tiredofit,

When we start factoring in the external costs of burning fossil fuel, like smog and soot, they will "become less advantageous."

They've enjoyed an unfair advantage that will end in future.

Posted 630 days ago.

JoeBlow

Is Al Gore profiting from Global Warming about like Bernie Madoff profiting from selling securities?

Posted 630 days ago.

harryanderson

Sure, I owe, Tiredofit,

When I was a kid, I was taught to leave things better than I found them. My generation hasn't done that.

One thing I'm doing is educating people to the dangers we face if we continue on our same course.

What are you doing?

Posted 630 days ago.

harryanderson

And why is it wrong for Al Gore, who is, after all, a private citizen, to profit from what Tiredofit says is a "most likely" future?

Isn't that how the free market is supposed to work? Those astute enough to invest in emerging technologies deserve to make money, don't they? That's what Bill Gates did. And Henry Ford.

Posted 630 days ago.

mythravere

Well in Al Gore's case he is kinda sorta a hypocrite.

For all he has said about the dangers of climate change and that we must shift ourselves off of fossil fuels his carbon footprint is rather large. And if he was serious about making the needed changes he'd lead by example.

There's ways for him to get around that could demonstrate low to no carbon use.

He could for one thing have his jet powered by carbon neutral jet fuels. And use the myriad of ways out there to reduce is living arrangements carbon footprint.

You know smaller more energy efficient home etc.

Posted 630 days ago.

JoeBlow

The point is being a hippocrite about global warming by over indulgence.

Posted 630 days ago.

JoeBlow

No prob Myth. I don't see any solution that would not have some kind of an enviromental affect, all I see is the government wanting to get rich from the problems. Al Gore making a billion dollars off this has no qualms about flying solo in a big jet to give speaches and living in a house that is much larger than needed.

Posted 630 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or