MIT professor: global warming is a ‘religion’

[PMZ]

show me the benefit.

Your children's children won't have to move away from the coast on foot... with a shopping cart for their belongings.

Maybe you can help with some actual numbers?

After we spend tens of trillions on all the green wish list, how much lower will CO2 be in 2080 compared to the level if we give the greens nothing?

You don't have to write a book describing the no cost alternative. Just give us a few paragraphs.

I imagine to be no cost we'll have to let wildfires burn themselves out. Do you think that will spell the end to all North American trees?

 

[daveman]

I see now.

Your recommendations are to get rid of the IPCC and government. Let big oil do what they want. Wait until fossil fuels are gone or we are, whichever comes first.

No wonder conservatives are being fired from government in droves.

Your recommendations are to get rid of the IPCC and government.

Those are my recommendations? Where did you read that?

Wait until fossil fuels are gone

You keep saying that but you never say when.
When will they be gone?

Try to put your feelings aside and think. For once.

Science isn't about feelings, it's about facts. Establishing the facts about our energy and climate future is what the IPCC was established to do. Everything that I've posted has been in support of the IPCC doing it's job, and using that insight to find the least cost path to a sustainable future.

Everything you've posted is about sticking our collective heads in the nearest dark place and hoping for a happy ending. That's thinking with your feelings.

I've proven to you conclusively that the purpose of the IPCC is to establish world socialism.

But you've stuck your head in a dark place and are hoping for a happy ending.

You're thinking with your feelings.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your children's children won't have to move away from the coast on foot... with a shopping cart for their belongings.

Maybe you can help with some actual numbers?

After we spend tens of trillions on all the green wish list, how much lower will CO2 be in 2080 compared to the level if we give the greens nothing?

You don't have to write a book describing the no cost alternative. Just give us a few paragraphs.

I imagine to be no cost we'll have to let wildfires burn themselves out. Do you think that will spell the end to all North American trees?

You don't have to write a book describing the no cost alternative. Just give us a few paragraphs.

End all "green" subsidies and mandates.
End the ethanol mandate.
Don't spend a dime of taxpayer funds to subsidize "green" vehicles or "green" power generation. Clear enough even for you to understand?

Now, if we take your direction and spend tens of trillions, how much lower is CO2 in 2080?

 

[PMZ]

Does the no cost alternative include free gasoline until we run out? If it does, I'm going to sell the Prius and get an old Dodge 426 hemi. WTF.

Free gasoline? That's something a liberal would push for, conservatives are all about the market.

When are we going to run of of hydrocarbons again?

Shocking that you drive a Prius. What fossil fuel generates your electrons?

How can the no cost alternative be no cost if we have to pay for gas?

Again you miss the profound chemistry that says that owning a car doesn't create AGW, burning gas does. Less gas, less AGW. Ask your teacher tomorrow to show you the math.

 

[daveman]

Just think. Bush spent all of those trillions and all of those lives protecting America's oil supply and I don't think that we've seen a drop of Iraqi oil since. Good conservative problem solving.

This no cost alternative must mean that we can disband all of the military we now need to keep that liquid gold flowing for free. Right?

Bush never said he was protecting America's oil supply. That was progressives, who can't comprehend anything bigger than a protest sign slogan.

 

[PMZ]

Just think. Bush spent all of those trillions and all of those lives protecting America's oil supply and I don't think that we've seen a drop of Iraqi oil since. Good conservative problem solving.

This no cost alternative must mean that we can disband all of the military we now need to keep that liquid gold flowing for free. Right?

Obama doesn't even want to build a pipeline to keep Canadian oil flowing.
I guess we don't need jobs or oil in Obama's world.

Show me the spherical trig that says the shortest route from Canada to China goes through Louisiana.

 

[PMZ]

I'm sure that conversations like today's make the problem clear to lots more people. It's not just about climate change. It's about working towards a better future. The conservative singular focus on doing nothing and hoping for the past to return would be the end of mankind's progress as we've known it. We've always had conservatives but except for rare years like the McCarthy era, and the Confederacy, we haven't had to deal with anti-American extremists. Now we do.

The power of media persuasion has been growing for decades. We thought that all that was at risk from that was to make us more materialistic. That was offset however by the ability to have what some consider a higher standard of living.

But, opening Pandora's box had ramifications beyond materialism. Now democracy is at risk as media conservatives have been led to long for the return of the wealthy white male run plutocracy our founders desired.

Congress has been rendered impotent. Businesses have forgotten how to grow. The concept of the same civil rights for everyone is being questioned yet again. The Bush policies have us $17T in debt instead of debt free as the CBO anticipated at the end of the Clinton era. All on top of the conservative war on government, science and knowledge and education. And the idea that we ignore climate change and dwindling fossil fuels and just suffer the consequences because we aren't, in their view, smart enough to solve problems.

These are fundamental changes to the fabric of America. We can hope that taking back America that began in 2008 will continue to grow as it has. That our democracy will be stronger than the pull of evangelical media propagandists chipping away at government.

America has always risen to every challenge. Mostly external threats. Now we have to rise to internal threat. And we can.

And there it is, folks -- PMS's "solution" to global warming: Democrat totalitarianism.

When fascism comes to America, it will be carrying a protest sign and screeching "It's for the children!!"

What's your solution to conservatism, PMS? Is it a Final one?

I expect so. Progressivism always winds up bathed in lakes of blood.

Always.

The little cowboy is one of those longing for the freedom to impose his will on others.

 

[PMZ]

show me the benefit.

Your children's children won't have to move away from the coast on foot... with a shopping cart for their belongings.

Maybe you can help with some actual numbers?

After we spend tens of trillions on all the green wish list, how much lower will CO2 be in 2080 compared to the level if we give the greens nothing?

You're not liberal so math should be easy for you and on top of that zero cost requires no math. Everything is free.

But I'm anxious to hear your vision of a free future anyway.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Does the no cost alternative include free gasoline until we run out? If it does, I'm going to sell the Prius and get an old Dodge 426 hemi. WTF.

Free gasoline? That's something a liberal would push for, conservatives are all about the market.

When are we going to run of of hydrocarbons again?

Shocking that you drive a Prius. What fossil fuel generates your electrons?

How can the no cost alternative be no cost if we have to pay for gas?

Again you miss the profound chemistry that says that owning a car doesn't create AGW, burning gas does. Less gas, less AGW. Ask your teacher tomorrow to show you the math.

How can the no cost alternative be no cost if we have to pay for gas?

Who said anything about a no cost alternative?

Again you miss the profound chemistry that says that owning a car doesn't create AGW, burning gas does.

Yes, burning natural gas and coal generates CO2.
Which is burned to generate your electrons?
Maybe an adult can help you understand the question?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your children's children won't have to move away from the coast on foot... with a shopping cart for their belongings.

Maybe you can help with some actual numbers?

After we spend tens of trillions on all the green wish list, how much lower will CO2 be in 2080 compared to the level if we give the greens nothing?

You're not liberal so math should be easy for you and on top of that zero cost requires no math. Everything is free.

But I'm anxious to hear your vision of a free future anyway.

Everything is free.

Is your imagination fueled by alcohol tonight?

I don't want to waste money on your CO2 reduction schemes.
You don't get free gasoline, comrade.

 

[flacaltenn]

the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report released in 2007 which controversially concluded, "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations."

It's not controversial when it's supported by the evidence and accepted by 97% of the world's climate scientists.

Controversial would be "global warming is due to changes in TSI" or "All the world's climate scientists involved in enormous conspiracy" or "Poster Daveman actually knows what he's talking about" or "Poster Daveman likes guns because he's happy with the size of his penis". THOSE would be controversial.

If only you had made the argument about what "IT" is and that 97% of climate scientists actually DO --- support "IT"..

Haven't really succeeded at that. Nor have you succeeded in degrading the importance of NATURAL cycles and events like Ocean Thermal and TSI. In fact --- these are on the list of NEW REVELATIONS to that imaginary 97% of scientists that lead a very cloistered life looking for ONLY man-caused reasons for the tiny 0.5 degree of warming during your lifetime...

 

[PMZ]

Your recommendations are to get rid of the IPCC and government.

Those are my recommendations? Where did you read that?

Wait until fossil fuels are gone

You keep saying that but you never say when.
When will they be gone?

Try to put your feelings aside and think. For once.

Science isn't about feelings, it's about facts. Establishing the facts about our energy and climate future is what the IPCC was established to do. Everything that I've posted has been in support of the IPCC doing it's job, and using that insight to find the least cost path to a sustainable future.

Everything you've posted is about sticking our collective heads in the nearest dark place and hoping for a happy ending. That's thinking with your feelings.

I've proven to you conclusively that the purpose of the IPCC is to establish world socialism.

But you've stuck your head in a dark place and are hoping for a happy ending.

You're thinking with your feelings.

No question that world socialism is bad.

But, perhaps world ignorance is worse. That seems to be the consensus from the previous dark ages.

Once we get rid of climate science we need to start on the others. A good old fashioned book burning.

We can learn from Mao's Cultural Revolution! Look how effectively that stamped out knowledge.

 

[daveman]

I see now.

Your recommendations are to get rid of the IPCC and government. Let big oil do what they want. Wait until fossil fuels are gone or we are, whichever comes first.

No wonder conservatives are being fired from government in droves.

You see shit. He said nothing like that, you arrogant prick.

You don't have any expertise. You don't have any answers. You don't have anything to merit your unmerited arrogance.

All you have is internet access and a raging case of impotence, Skippy.

And I know you can't comprehend this, but I laugh at people like you.

Oh look. The little cowboy is all tough and stuff.

Nope, I don't have to pretend to be anything, Skippy. What you see is what you get.

But your facade is wearing thin, kid. Probably because it's been passed around among so many of you.

Dood, you're like something out of a movie. "Hello, Central Casting? Yeah, I need a progressive...right...arrogant, superior, no resume to speak of...uh huh. Self-proclaimed expert in climate science. What? No, no education in climate science. Look, I know you got a thousand of 'em. Look through the files, pick one at random...you got one? 'PMZ', his name is? Perfect! Send him over!!"

Laughing at you, Skippy. I know that makes your blood boil.

Too bad.

 

[daveman]

show me the benefit.

Your children's children won't have to move away from the coast on foot... with a shopping cart for their belongings.

Ooooh. Fear-mongering.

If you had the science on your side, you wouldn't have to rely on emotional appeals.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Just think. Bush spent all of those trillions and all of those lives protecting America's oil supply and I don't think that we've seen a drop of Iraqi oil since. Good conservative problem solving.

This no cost alternative must mean that we can disband all of the military we now need to keep that liquid gold flowing for free. Right?

Obama doesn't even want to build a pipeline to keep Canadian oil flowing.
I guess we don't need jobs or oil in Obama's world.

Show me the spherical trig that says the shortest route from Canada to China goes through Louisiana.

It is true that without a pipeline to the US, the oil will flow to China instead.

 

[PMZ]

Maybe you can help with some actual numbers?

After we spend tens of trillions on all the green wish list, how much lower will CO2 be in 2080 compared to the level if we give the greens nothing?

You don't have to write a book describing the no cost alternative. Just give us a few paragraphs.

I imagine to be no cost we'll have to let wildfires burn themselves out. Do you think that will spell the end to all North American trees?

You don't have to write a book describing the no cost alternative. Just give us a few paragraphs.

End all "green" subsidies and mandates.
End the ethanol mandate.
Don't spend a dime of taxpayer funds to subsidize "green" vehicles or "green" power generation. Clear enough even for you to understand?

Now, if we take your direction and spend tens of trillions, how much lower is CO2 in 2080?

That's your no cost alternative? Really?

Increase our demand for foriegn oil?

Were you Bush's Energy Czar or something? CEO of Big Oil Inc perhaps?

 

[daveman]

I see now.

Your recommendations are to get rid of the IPCC and government. Let big oil do what they want. Wait until fossil fuels are gone or we are, whichever comes first.

No wonder conservatives are being fired from government in droves.

You see shit. He said nothing like that, you arrogant prick.

You don't have any expertise. You don't have any answers. You don't have anything to merit your unmerited arrogance.

All you have is internet access and a raging case of impotence, Skippy.

And I know you can't comprehend this, but I laugh at people like you.

This is the best description that I've seen of the emotional basis of conservatism. Whenever anyone is tempted to risk everything that America is and stands for by voting one of these into government, think of this post.

What America is and stands for?

America ISN'T a progressive shit-hole. But you sure do want it to be.

You laughably claim to be taking back America. America was never yours to begin with.

The USSR, however, was. You can have that back. Oh, wait -- no, you can't. My America made it collapse.

Dum de dum.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

show me the benefit.

Your children's children won't have to move away from the coast on foot... with a shopping cart for their belongings.

Ooooh. Fear-mongering.

If you had the science on your side, you wouldn't have to rely on emotional appeals.

I want to know why my grandkids need to move away from the coast of Lake Michigan?

Maybe when the Cubs finally win the World Series, the lake will engulf the city?

 

[PMZ]

Just think. Bush spent all of those trillions and all of those lives protecting America's oil supply and I don't think that we've seen a drop of Iraqi oil since. Good conservative problem solving.

This no cost alternative must mean that we can disband all of the military we now need to keep that liquid gold flowing for free. Right?

Bush never said he was protecting America's oil supply. That was progressives, who can't comprehend anything bigger than a protest sign slogan.

You didn't realize that Bush lied?

 

[daveman]

I'm sure that conversations like today's make the problem clear to lots more people. It's not just about climate change. It's about working towards a better future. The conservative singular focus on doing nothing and hoping for the past to return would be the end of mankind's progress as we've known it. We've always had conservatives but except for rare years like the McCarthy era, and the Confederacy, we haven't had to deal with anti-American extremists. Now we do.

The power of media persuasion has been growing for decades. We thought that all that was at risk from that was to make us more materialistic. That was offset however by the ability to have what some consider a higher standard of living.

But, opening Pandora's box had ramifications beyond materialism. Now democracy is at risk as media conservatives have been led to long for the return of the wealthy white male run plutocracy our founders desired.

Congress has been rendered impotent. Businesses have forgotten how to grow. The concept of the same civil rights for everyone is being questioned yet again. The Bush policies have us $17T in debt instead of debt free as the CBO anticipated at the end of the Clinton era. All on top of the conservative war on government, science and knowledge and education. And the idea that we ignore climate change and dwindling fossil fuels and just suffer the consequences because we aren't, in their view, smart enough to solve problems.

These are fundamental changes to the fabric of America. We can hope that taking back America that began in 2008 will continue to grow as it has. That our democracy will be stronger than the pull of evangelical media propagandists chipping away at government.

America has always risen to every challenge. Mostly external threats. Now we have to rise to internal threat. And we can.

And there it is, folks -- PMS's "solution" to global warming: Democrat totalitarianism.

When fascism comes to America, it will be carrying a protest sign and screeching "It's for the children!!"

What's your solution to conservatism, PMS? Is it a Final one?

I expect so. Progressivism always winds up bathed in lakes of blood.

Always.

The little cowboy is one of those longing for the freedom to impose his will on others.

Sheer projection. I want the maximum amount of personal liberty conducive to civilized society. And I want it for everybody.

YOU want to tell people what kind of cars they can drive and what kind of light bulbs they can buy -- "for their own good".