Why do some take belief in Global Warming as a political issue?

[Late2TheParty]

I believe the science of climate change and global warming is pretty solid. But I've been called a liberal or democrat/progressive on that alone.

Now, I never said I think Al Gore's carbon trading scam or whatever was the best solution, just that I believe the science....

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

 

[konradv]

I believe the science of climate change and global warming is pretty solid. But I've been called a liberal or democrat/progressive on that alone.

Now, I never said I think Al Gore's carbon trading scam or whatever was the best solution, just that I believe the science....

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

You'll have to ask the skeptics/deniers, they're the ones trying to pretend that charges of "socialism" aren't "politicizing the issue"! Then when some people send PRIVATE emails about how to counter this politicization, the perpetrators STEAL THEM and act all shocked and start pointing fingers!!!

 

[westwall]

I believe the science of climate change and global warming is pretty solid. But I've been called a liberal or democrat/progressive on that alone.

Now, I never said I think Al Gore's carbon trading scam or whatever was the best solution, just that I believe the science....

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

You would be wrong on your assumption. Take a look at a few of the sceptics sites and then come back and talk to us about the "settled science".


Here is a little segement from climateaudit...


"Unfortunately, IPCC seems far more concerned about secrecy than in requiring its contributors to archive data. I received another request to remove discussion of IPCC draft reports. On this issue, David Appell and I are in full agreement – see David Appell’s collection of ZOD chapters here. Read More »"

Why, oh why, if the science is so solid would anybody need or want to hide it?


Climate Depot

Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change

Climate Audit

 

[westwall]

I believe the science of climate change and global warming is pretty solid. But I've been called a liberal or democrat/progressive on that alone.

Now, I never said I think Al Gore's carbon trading scam or whatever was the best solution, just that I believe the science....

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

You'll have to ask the skeptics/deniers, they're the ones trying to pretend that charges of "socialism" aren't "politicizing the issue"! Then when some people send PRIVATE emails about how to counter this politicization, the perpetrators STEAL THEM and act all shocked and start pointing fingers!!!

Actually it was an insider who released the CLIMATEGATE emails. No matter how hard you try and smear the sceptics the fact remains it was someone on the inside who released the information. And surprise surprise it was stuff that had been requested from the CRU for YEARS! So much for scientific integrity.

 

[konradv]

I believe the science of climate change and global warming is pretty solid. But I've been called a liberal or democrat/progressive on that alone.

Now, I never said I think Al Gore's carbon trading scam or whatever was the best solution, just that I believe the science....

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

You'll have to ask the skeptics/deniers, they're the ones trying to pretend that charges of "socialism" aren't "politicizing the issue"! Then when some people send PRIVATE emails about how to counter this politicization, the perpetrators STEAL THEM and act all shocked and start pointing fingers!!!

Actually it was an insider who released the CLIMATEGATE emails. No matter how hard you try and smear the sceptics the fact remains it was someone on the inside who released the information. And surprise surprise it was stuff that had been requested from the CRU for YEARS! So much for scientific integrity.

Private emails have been requested for years? Seems doubtful!!!

 

[Intense]

I believe the science of climate change and global warming is pretty solid. But I've been called a liberal or democrat/progressive on that alone.

Now, I never said I think Al Gore's carbon trading scam or whatever was the best solution, just that I believe the science....

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

Be Fruitful, Multiply, Replenish the Earth. It is a Temple. You are not going to go wrong in maintaining it. Hi-Jacking the cause for Power and Control is another matter.

 

[merrill]

And consider this:

While global warming has been a concern for many many many many many many many decades some things are for certain:

1. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions of humans polluting planet earth

2. Never before has there been billions upon billions of gasoline burning vehicles
spewing pollution into the atmosphere

3. Never before has there been billions of homes demanding energy from polluting sources

4. Never before has there been billions of buildings demanding energy from polluting sources

5. Never before has there been billions of polluting energy generating sources

6. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans supporting the clearing of the rainforest for food products not knowing the long term impact of removing massive numbers of trees and medicinal plants.

7. Never before has planet earth been expected to absorb tons and tons and tons and tons of pollution with human beings having no idea what the impact might be.

8. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of human beings believing THEIR pollution is having zero impact ....... can we say ignorance is bliss.

9. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans applying millions of gallons and or pounds of toxic chemicals to the landscapes.



Sloan's proposal for an electric car fee met with skepticism / LJWorld.com

 

[Intense]

And consider this:

While global warming has been a concern for many many many many many many many decades some things are for certain:

1. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions of humans polluting planet earth

2. Never before has there been billions upon billions of gasoline burning vehicles
spewing pollution into the atmosphere

3. Never before has there been billions of homes demanding energy from polluting sources

4. Never before has there been billions of buildings demanding energy from polluting sources

5. Never before has there been billions of polluting energy generating sources

6. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans supporting the clearing of the rainforest for food products not knowing the long term impact of removing massive numbers of trees and medicinal plants.

7. Never before has planet earth been expected to absorb tons and tons and tons and tons of pollution with human beings having no idea what the impact might be.

8. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of human beings believing THEIR pollution is having zero impact ....... can we say ignorance is bliss.

9. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans applying millions of gallons and or pounds of toxic chemicals to the landscapes.



Sloan's proposal for an electric car fee met with skepticism / LJWorld.com

..... Never in Recorded History, and that is what we are limited to. Still, Nature has it's own fixes.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsTK2LHZKPQ]Nature's Way by Spirit - YouTube[/ame]
Spirit - "Nature's Way" (1970)

This is no way to treat a Temple? Agreed. Totalitarianism is not the answer either

 

[Big Fitz]

And consider this:

While global warming has been a concern for many many many many many many many decades some things are for certain:

1. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions of humans polluting planet earth

2. Never before has there been billions upon billions of gasoline burning vehicles
spewing pollution into the atmosphere

3. Never before has there been billions of homes demanding energy from polluting sources

4. Never before has there been billions of buildings demanding energy from polluting sources

5. Never before has there been billions of polluting energy generating sources

6. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans supporting the clearing of the rainforest for food products not knowing the long term impact of removing massive numbers of trees and medicinal plants.

7. Never before has planet earth been expected to absorb tons and tons and tons and tons of pollution with human beings having no idea what the impact might be.

8. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of human beings believing THEIR pollution is having zero impact ....... can we say ignorance is bliss.

9. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans applying millions of gallons and or pounds of toxic chemicals to the landscapes.



Sloan's proposal for an electric car fee met with skepticism / LJWorld.com

If you say billions more than once, you're playing with it.

 

[Intense]

And consider this:

While global warming has been a concern for many many many many many many many decades some things are for certain:

1. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions of humans polluting planet earth

2. Never before has there been billions upon billions of gasoline burning vehicles
spewing pollution into the atmosphere

3. Never before has there been billions of homes demanding energy from polluting sources

4. Never before has there been billions of buildings demanding energy from polluting sources

5. Never before has there been billions of polluting energy generating sources

6. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans supporting the clearing of the rainforest for food products not knowing the long term impact of removing massive numbers of trees and medicinal plants.

7. Never before has planet earth been expected to absorb tons and tons and tons and tons of pollution with human beings having no idea what the impact might be.

8. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of human beings believing THEIR pollution is having zero impact ....... can we say ignorance is bliss.

9. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans applying millions of gallons and or pounds of toxic chemicals to the landscapes.



Sloan's proposal for an electric car fee met with skepticism / LJWorld.com

If you say billions more than once, you're playing with it.

Like a BaZillion? Like Forever and Ever?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I believe the science of climate change and global warming is pretty solid. But I've been called a liberal or democrat/progressive on that alone.

Now, I never said I think Al Gore's carbon trading scam or whatever was the best solution, just that I believe the science....

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

(Better Late2TheParty....than never.)

"Global warming is now officially considered a threat to U.S. national security."

Final Nail In Teabaggers' Box​

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And consider this:

While global warming has been a concern for many many many many many many many decades some things are for certain:

1. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions of humans polluting planet earth

2. Never before has there been billions upon billions of gasoline burning vehicles
spewing pollution into the atmosphere

3. Never before has there been billions of homes demanding energy from polluting sources

4. Never before has there been billions of buildings demanding energy from polluting sources

5. Never before has there been billions of polluting energy generating sources

6. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans supporting the clearing of the rainforest for food products not knowing the long term impact of removing massive numbers of trees and medicinal plants.

7. Never before has planet earth been expected to absorb tons and tons and tons and tons of pollution with human beings having no idea what the impact might be.

8. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of human beings believing THEIR pollution is having zero impact ....... can we say ignorance is bliss.

9. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans applying millions of gallons and or pounds of toxic chemicals to the landscapes.



Sloan's proposal for an electric car fee met with skepticism / LJWorld.com

We had 6 billion 10 years ago, 5 billion before that, 4 billion before that, etc etc etc..... and unless you can find a statistic to back up your claim the idea that suddenly there are billions more vehicles is ludicrous.

And as to the supposed man made global warming? Only been around since the late 80's. so that would be 2 decades not how ever many you claimed.

Further the prediction in the early 1900's was that global temperatures would rise 1 degree by 2000. It barely met that, the supposed concern was that 1/3 of a degree occurred in about 20 years. Which by the way there has been no discernible temp increase since 1998. That is 14 years. Almost as long as the supposed warming caused by man was.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

It’s politicized by conservatives, for the most part, needless to say.

They incorrectly believe GCC is a ‘liberal contrivance’ designed to foist ‘unnecessary’ regulation on business.

They also incorrectly believe that such regulation will have an ‘adverse effect’ on the economy.

And conservatives buy into the canard that treaties and other international agreements designed to address GCC will be the advent of a ‘one world government’ or place American at some sort of economic disadvantage with regard to developing nations.

It is, in essence, typical conservative hyperbole, ignorance, and fear-mongering.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

And consider this:

While global warming has been a concern for many many many many many many many decades some things are for certain:

1. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions of humans polluting planet earth

2. Never before has there been billions upon billions of gasoline burning vehicles
spewing pollution into the atmosphere

3. Never before has there been billions of homes demanding energy from polluting sources

4. Never before has there been billions of buildings demanding energy from polluting sources

5. Never before has there been billions of polluting energy generating sources

6. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans supporting the clearing of the rainforest for food products not knowing the long term impact of removing massive numbers of trees and medicinal plants.

7. Never before has planet earth been expected to absorb tons and tons and tons and tons of pollution with human beings having no idea what the impact might be.

8. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of human beings believing THEIR pollution is having zero impact ....... can we say ignorance is bliss.

9. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans applying millions of gallons and or pounds of toxic chemicals to the landscapes.



Sloan's proposal for an electric car fee met with skepticism / LJWorld.com

We had 6 billion 10 years ago, 5 billion before that, 4 billion before that, etc etc etc..... and unless you can find a statistic to back up your claim the idea that suddenly there are billions more vehicles is ludicrous.

And as to the supposed man made global warming? Only been around since the late 80's. so that would be 2 decades not how ever many you claimed.

Further the prediction in the early 1900's was that global temperatures would rise 1 degree by 2000.

Teabaggers are still big fans o' early 1900's meteorological-technology, huh?

It barely met that, the supposed concern was that 1/3 of a degree occurred in about 20 years. Which by the way there has been no discernible temp increase since 1998. That is 14 years. Almost as long as the supposed warming caused by man was.

So.....snow is merely hiding, from us, this year.....huh??

Stupid Teabaggers​

 

[westwall]

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

It’s politicized by conservatives, for the most part, needless to say.

They incorrectly believe GCC is a ‘liberal contrivance’ designed to foist ‘unnecessary’ regulation on business.

They also incorrectly believe that such regulation will have an ‘adverse effect’ on the economy.

And conservatives buy into the canard that treaties and other international agreements designed to address GCC will be the advent of a ‘one world government’ or place American at some sort of economic disadvantage with regard to developing nations.

It is, in essence, typical conservative hyperbole, ignorance, and fear-mongering.

Actually it is your AGW folks who have claimed that.

Former Vice President Al Gore declared that the Congressional climate bill will help bring about “global governance.”

“I bring you good news from the U.S., “Gore said on July 7, 2009 in Oxford at the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, sponsored by UK Times.

“Just two weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey climate bill,” Gore said, noting it was “very much a step in the right direction.” President Obama has pushed for the passage of the bill in the Senate and attended a G8 summit this week where he agreed to attempt to keep the Earth's temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C.

Gore touted the Congressional climate bill, claiming it “will dramatically increase the prospects for success” in combating what he sees as the “crisis” of man-made global warming.

“But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.” (Editor's Note: Gore makes the “global governance” comment at the 1min. 10 sec. mark in this UK Times video.)

Gore's call for “global governance” echoes former French President Jacques Chirac's call in 2000.

On November 20, 2000, then French President Chirac said during a speech at The Hague that the UN's Kyoto Protocol represented "the first component of an authentic global governance."

“For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance,” Chirac explained. “From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace,” Chirac added.

Former EU Environment Minister Margot Wallstrom said, "Kyoto is about the economy, about leveling the playing field for big businesses worldwide." Canadian Prime Minster Stephen Harper once dismissed UN's Kyoto Protocol as a “socialist scheme.”

'Global Carbon Tax' Urged at UN Meeting

In addition, calls for a global carbon tax have been urged at recent UN global warming conferences. In December 2007, the UN climate conference in Bali, urged the adoption of a global carbon tax that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.”

“Finally someone will pay for these [climate related] costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, said at the 2007 UN conference after a panel titled “A Global CO2 Tax.”

Schwank noted that wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.” The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal.”

The 2007 UN conference was presented with a report from the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment titled “Global Solidarity in Financing Adaptation.” The report stated there was an “urgent need” for a global tax in order for “damages [from climate change] to be kept from growing to truly catastrophic levels, especially in vulnerable countries of the developing world.”

The tens of billions of dollars per year generated by a global tax would “flow into a global Multilateral Adaptation Fund” to help nations cope with global warming, according to the report.

Schwank said a global carbon dioxide tax is an idea long overdue that is urgently needed to establish “a funding scheme which generates the resources required to address the dimension of challenge with regard to climate change costs.”

'Redistribution of wealth'

The environmental group Friends of the Earth advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations during the 2007 UN climate conference.

"A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.

[Editor's Note: Many critics have often charged that proposed climate tax and regulatory “solutions” were more important to the promoters of man-made climate fears than the accuracy of their science. Former Colorado Senator Tim Wirth reportedly said, "We've got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing — in terms of economic policy and environmental policy."]

Related Links:

Update: U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon: "A climate deal must include an equitable global governance structure' - Oct. 25, 2009, New York Times

Update: Climate Depot OPED: 'Controlling climate? More like controlling humans' - October 28, 2009 - Excerpt: Beware of 'unprecedented transfer of wealth, power and control to domestic and global governance'

Update: German Climate Advisor 'proposes creation of a CO2 budget for every person on planet!' - Sept. 6, 2009

Global Warming for Global Governance
http://www.climatedepot.com/a/1893/...-Bill-Will-Help-Bring-About-Global-Governance

 

[Mr. Shaman]

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

It’s politicized by conservatives, for the most part, needless to say.

They incorrectly believe GCC is a ‘liberal contrivance’ designed to foist ‘unnecessary’ regulation on business.

They also incorrectly believe that such regulation will have an ‘adverse effect’ on the economy.

And conservatives buy into the canard that treaties and other international agreements designed to address GCC will be the advent of a ‘one world government’ or place American at some sort of economic disadvantage with regard to developing nations.

It is, in essence, typical conservative hyperbole, ignorance, and fear-mongering.

.....With a serious dose o' paranoia.

 

[westwall]

So this doesn't get swept under the rug...



Actually it is your AGW folks who have claimed that.

Former Vice President Al Gore declared that the Congressional climate bill will help bring about “global governance.”

“I bring you good news from the U.S., “Gore said on July 7, 2009 in Oxford at the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, sponsored by UK Times.

“Just two weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey climate bill,” Gore said, noting it was “very much a step in the right direction.” President Obama has pushed for the passage of the bill in the Senate and attended a G8 summit this week where he agreed to attempt to keep the Earth's temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C.

Gore touted the Congressional climate bill, claiming it “will dramatically increase the prospects for success” in combating what he sees as the “crisis” of man-made global warming.

“But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.” (Editor's Note: Gore makes the “global governance” comment at the 1min. 10 sec. mark in this UK Times video.)

Gore's call for “global governance” echoes former French President Jacques Chirac's call in 2000.

On November 20, 2000, then French President Chirac said during a speech at The Hague that the UN's Kyoto Protocol represented "the first component of an authentic global governance."

“For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance,” Chirac explained. “From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace,” Chirac added.

Former EU Environment Minister Margot Wallstrom said, "Kyoto is about the economy, about leveling the playing field for big businesses worldwide." Canadian Prime Minster Stephen Harper once dismissed UN's Kyoto Protocol as a “socialist scheme.”

'Global Carbon Tax' Urged at UN Meeting

In addition, calls for a global carbon tax have been urged at recent UN global warming conferences. In December 2007, the UN climate conference in Bali, urged the adoption of a global carbon tax that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.”

“Finally someone will pay for these [climate related] costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, said at the 2007 UN conference after a panel titled “A Global CO2 Tax.”

Schwank noted that wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.” The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal.”

The 2007 UN conference was presented with a report from the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment titled “Global Solidarity in Financing Adaptation.” The report stated there was an “urgent need” for a global tax in order for “damages [from climate change] to be kept from growing to truly catastrophic levels, especially in vulnerable countries of the developing world.”

The tens of billions of dollars per year generated by a global tax would “flow into a global Multilateral Adaptation Fund” to help nations cope with global warming, according to the report.

Schwank said a global carbon dioxide tax is an idea long overdue that is urgently needed to establish “a funding scheme which generates the resources required to address the dimension of challenge with regard to climate change costs.”

'Redistribution of wealth'

The environmental group Friends of the Earth advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations during the 2007 UN climate conference.

"A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.

[Editor's Note: Many critics have often charged that proposed climate tax and regulatory “solutions” were more important to the promoters of man-made climate fears than the accuracy of their science. Former Colorado Senator Tim Wirth reportedly said, "We've got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing — in terms of economic policy and environmental policy."]

Related Links:

Update: U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon: "A climate deal must include an equitable global governance structure' - Oct. 25, 2009, New York Times

Update: Climate Depot OPED: 'Controlling climate? More like controlling humans' - October 28, 2009 - Excerpt: Beware of 'unprecedented transfer of wealth, power and control to domestic and global governance'

Update: German Climate Advisor 'proposes creation of a CO2 budget for every person on planet!' - Sept. 6, 2009

Global Warming for Global Governance
http://www.climatedepot.com/a/1893/...-Bill-Will-Help-Bring-About-Global-Governance

 

[bripat9643]

I believe the science of climate change and global warming is pretty solid. But I've been called a liberal or democrat/progressive on that alone.

Now, I never said I think Al Gore's carbon trading scam or whatever was the best solution, just that I believe the science....

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

You're a gullible dupe. Global warming is a scam designed to con the public into approving massive transfers of wealth. There's nothing "solid" about it.

 

[bripat9643]

So why is this belief treated as if reflects on my political leanings one way or another by so many others?

It’s politicized by conservatives, for the most part, needless to say.

They incorrectly believe GCC is a ‘liberal contrivance’ designed to foist ‘unnecessary’ regulation on business.

They don't "incorrectly" believe that. It happens to be fact.

They also incorrectly believe that such regulation will have an ‘adverse effect’ on the economy.

ROFL! You're are just one vast geyser of economic idiocy, aren't you? All regulation has an adverse effect on the economy.

And conservatives buy into the canard that treaties and other international agreements designed to address GCC will be the advent of a ‘one world government’ or place American at some sort of economic disadvantage with regard to developing nations.

The people who propose these treaties also believe that. They've been caught admitting it numerous times.

It is, in essence, typical conservative hyperbole, ignorance, and fear-mongering.

Truth, in other words.

 

[skookerasbil]

And consider this:

While global warming has been a concern for many many many many many many many decades some things are for certain:

1. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions of humans polluting planet earth

2. Never before has there been billions upon billions of gasoline burning vehicles
spewing pollution into the atmosphere

3. Never before has there been billions of homes demanding energy from polluting sources

4. Never before has there been billions of buildings demanding energy from polluting sources

5. Never before has there been billions of polluting energy generating sources

6. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans supporting the clearing of the rainforest for food products not knowing the long term impact of removing massive numbers of trees and medicinal plants.

7. Never before has planet earth been expected to absorb tons and tons and tons and tons of pollution with human beings having no idea what the impact might be.

8. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of human beings believing THEIR pollution is having zero impact ....... can we say ignorance is bliss.

9. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans applying millions of gallons and or pounds of toxic chemicals to the landscapes.



Sloan's proposal for an electric car fee met with skepticism / LJWorld.com

We had 6 billion 10 years ago, 5 billion before that, 4 billion before that, etc etc etc..... and unless you can find a statistic to back up your claim the idea that suddenly there are billions more vehicles is ludicrous.

And as to the supposed man made global warming? Only been around since the late 80's. so that would be 2 decades not how ever many you claimed.

Further the prediction in the early 1900's was that global temperatures would rise 1 degree by 2000.

Teabaggers are still big fans o' early 1900's meteorological-technology, huh?

It barely met that, the supposed concern was that 1/3 of a degree occurred in about 20 years. Which by the way there has been no discernible temp increase since 1998. That is 14 years. Almost as long as the supposed warming caused by man was.

So.....snow is merely hiding, from us, this year.....huh??

Stupid Teabaggers​

Losing asshole.............. Drip, Drip, Drip: Yet Another Green Energy Stimulus Recipient Hits the Skids (the third this week!)


Will play real well come November s0n!!!