Republicans alone in dening global warming

[Chris]

"It is difficult to identify another major political party in any democracy as thoroughly dismissive of climate science as is the GOP here." That's the pull quote from an important column in the National Journal today and it reveals an ugly, under-reported truth about American politics. Conservatives and conservative leaders the world over -- David Cameron's Tories in Britain, Nicolas Sarkozy in France, Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union in Germany, and so on -- do not shy from the science of climate change. In fact, there's only one democracy in the world where a prominent political party has made it a point to deny climate science: The United States. But why?

Why Are The Republicans The World's Only Major Political Party Denying Climate Change? : TreeHugger

 

[Revere]

There are no conservatives in Europe. Just less of the same communists.

 

[Chris]

What landed us in our current situation had to do with a combination of the rise of the Tea Party, opportunistic and well-funded lobbies, and a specific major media outlet or two dominating the conservative voice at a particular point in time.

 

[Trajan]

you're article is titled as junk so I won't bother to read it.....why?

because reps don't DENY global warming ( nice change of phrase, GW has become toxic) they just disagree as to how bad it is, why and what to do about it....

I am sure thats to subtle for tree huggers dot com to understand or digest though...

 

[Revere]

How does the viewership of FoxNews compare to the population of the US, or the percent of people who see AGW as fraud?

 

[Revere]

All bullshit eventually collapses of its own weight. If you think you to have to manage informationn to perpetuate it, that proves my point.

 

[Trajan]

What landed us in our current situation had to do with a combination of the rise of the Tea Party, opportunistic and well-funded lobbies, and a specific major media outlet or two dominating the conservative voice at a particular point in time.

check this out-

What landed GW adherents in their current situation had to do with a combination of the rise of the UN Eco. opportunists and their well-funded lobbies, and specifically the IPCC and major media outlets or five dominating the message at this particular point in time.

 

[Oddball]

What landed us in our current situation had to do with a combination of the rise of the Tea Party, opportunistic and well-funded lobbies, and a specific major media outlet or two dominating the conservative voice at a particular point in time.

check this out-

What landed GW adherents in their current situation had to do with a combination of the rise of the UN Eco. opportunists and their well-funded lobbies, and specifically the IPCC and major media outlets or five dominating the message at this particular point in time.

Gotta hate it when that happens!

 

[Old Rocks]

The Republican Party is the best party that oil money could buy.

 

[Revere]

I need oil and so do you.

The people who are trying to tell us we don't are the sociopaths.

 

[del]

The Republican Party is the best party that oil money could buy.

keep telling yourself that.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The Republican Party is the best party that oil money could buy.

The only way to convince anyone of your case is for the earth's temperatures to start rising up fast enough for people to notice the changes within their own lifes within a matter of a short couple of years. Because most don't trust the temperature data be it satellite, surface or otherwise.

The scientist either have done a very bad job with proving their case or the skeptics could be right. If they're doing a bad job proven their case then most people think they're a joke and need a good amount of discomfort before they wonder wtf is going on...Of course they maybe right, but they're utterly failing, so far.

 

[Old Rocks]

Wasn't a Democrat kissing the Suadi prince.

 

[Revere]

Why do you hate Saudis?

 

[Revere]

The notion that "truth" has to be defended by banishing certain media outlets and policital parties to gulags tells you it's not "truth."

 

[Mad Scientist]

The Republican Party is the best party that oil money could buy.

Until Obama came along:
Obama biggest recipient of BP cash - Erika Lovley - POLITICO.com

BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama,

 

[Old Rocks]

The Republican Party is the best party that oil money could buy.

The only way to convince anyone of your case is for the earth's temperatures to start rising up fast enough for people to notice the changes within their own lifes within a matter of a short couple of years. Because most don't trust the temperature data be it satellite, surface or otherwise.

The scientist either have done a very bad job with proving their case or the skeptics could be right. If they're doing a bad job proven their case then most people think they're a joke and need a good amount of discomfort before they wonder wtf is going on...Of course they maybe right, but they're utterly failing, so far.

Excepting cases like the heat wave in Russia and, ealier, Europe, won't be heat that is the first noticiable product of a rapid climate change. It will be rapidly rising prices for food as there are crop failures in differant parts of the world, due to heat, to little, or too much, rain. By the time the average American really becomes aware of the fact that he has been led down the primrose path by the big energy companies, he, and his family, will be completely screwed.

 

[Revere]

The Republican Party is the best party that oil money could buy.

The only way to convince anyone of your case is for the earth's temperatures to start rising up fast enough for people to notice the changes within their own lifes within a matter of a short couple of years. Because most don't trust the temperature data be it satellite, surface or otherwise.

The scientist either have done a very bad job with proving their case or the skeptics could be right. If they're doing a bad job proven their case then most people think they're a joke and need a good amount of discomfort before they wonder wtf is going on...Of course they maybe right, but they're utterly failing, so far.

Excepting cases like the heat wave in Russia and, ealier, Europe, won't be heat that is the first noticiable product of a rapid climate change. It will be rapidly rising prices for food as there are crop failures in differant parts of the world, due to heat, to little, or too much, rain. By the time the average American really becomes aware of the fact that he has been led down the primrose path by the big energy companies, he, and his family, will be completely screwed.

Where is the "science" that says change will be "rapid?"

 

[Old Rocks]

Now if I give to a political group, are you going to credit that to my employer? That is what that article has done.

 

[Old Rocks]

The only way to convince anyone of your case is for the earth's temperatures to start rising up fast enough for people to notice the changes within their own lifes within a matter of a short couple of years. Because most don't trust the temperature data be it satellite, surface or otherwise.

The scientist either have done a very bad job with proving their case or the skeptics could be right. If they're doing a bad job proven their case then most people think they're a joke and need a good amount of discomfort before they wonder wtf is going on...Of course they maybe right, but they're utterly failing, so far.

Excepting cases like the heat wave in Russia and, ealier, Europe, won't be heat that is the first noticiable product of a rapid climate change. It will be rapidly rising prices for food as there are crop failures in differant parts of the world, due to heat, to little, or too much, rain. By the time the average American really becomes aware of the fact that he has been led down the primrose path by the big energy companies, he, and his family, will be completely screwed.

Where is the "science" that says change will be "rapid?"

Prior history of climate changes. Younger Dryas. Both going in and coming out of the Younger Dryas, the primary change occured in about a decade, more or less.

Look at what is happening in the Arctic right now. The depth of the permafrost thaw, and the amount of methane that it is releasing is happening rapidly, an acclelerating acceleration.

Arctic Climate Threat--Methane from Thawing Permafrost: Scientific American

Ongoing observations, made by my research team during trips to Cherskii and numerous other sites and by our colleagues, reinforce the sense that thawing is accelerating and indicate that the emissions could be much greater than anticipated. My group’s latest estimates are that under current warming rates, by 2100 permafrost thawing could boost methane emissions far beyond what would be produced by all other natural and man-made sources. The added greenhouse gas, along with the extra carbon dioxide that exposed, thawing ground would release, together could raise the mean annual temperature of the earth by an additional 0.32 degree C, according to Vladimir Alexeev, also at Fairbanks.