Andrew is amazing. Inhofe votes against children, farmers, families and veterans.
Let’s help the good guy.
http://www.andrewforoklahoma.com
http://www.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/18228
I’m impressed (or rather—not dissappointed as usual) to see Rice isn’t proposing to use corn for ethanol or “clean coal” or some other such bogus, industry-backed, psuedo-progressive approach to alternative energy like, unlike most so-called progressive politicians.
Regarding whattheheck:
There are also people who think that PCBs and DDT are harmless to humans. And, while they may rightfully discount most of the scientific evidence to the contrary, most scientists in the field would yeild to the huge weight of evidence that the chemicals are very likely to be harmful to humans. You can play it safe (even though you can’t be absolutely certain it necessary) or be reckless (throwing caution to the wind).
A few simple stats: over the last 650000 years the CO2 level has varied between 180 and 300ppm. In the last 150 years humans have increased CO2 levels from 282 to 383ppm—well beyond the naturally occuring maximum. Of course climate change is far more complicated than a simple CO2 cycle, but temperatures have followed the CO2 level throughout studied geological history. Anyone who disregards that suggestion that CO2 levels rising well above historical levels creates dangerous situation in that temperatures as well may exceed historical levels despite whatever the natural cycle we are in would cause is a reckless fool and a blight on humanity. The fact that the anthropogenic CO2 shift has occurred in a tiny fraction of the time such a change usually takes makes the short and long term changes we may be facing unpredictable and ought to be quite alarming. It’s not just another vote-getting issue. More to your point, the solution(s) are also solutions to economic and social issues and may be passable under the title of climate change mitigation than they would be under the headings of social welfare or taxation.
“Separation of church and state
Posted by beersnob on Jun 4, 2008 at 7:08 AM
beersnob, I quite agree with you. What’s more, I think the Bible has been a tool used for many years to make people accept the unacceptable. The notion that a god chose a particular people from the many tribes to talk to is quite discouraging. The notion that all the creation was just something for man to use as he pleased is such a big mistake we are bound to pay for it. We are part of nature, not nature’s masters as we are constantly reminded by the events we are facing now. The sooner we all develop a conscious about the results we are harvesting through our thoughtless and selfish attitudes, the bigger a chance of trying to reverse our situation.
Posted by Maria on Jun 5, 2008 at 10:40 AM
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
Andrew is amazing. Inhofe votes against children, farmers, families and veterans.
Let’s help the good guy.
http://www.andrewforoklahoma.com
http://www.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/18228
There are people with excellent credentials who disagree with what has become the common wisdom regarding global warming or climate change. It may be we are entering a cycle such as the world has experienced many times before. Some say we may be about to experience another cooling period. What is without doubt is that our habits are causing toxic fumes and endangering lives
I’m impressed (or rather—not dissappointed as usual) to see Rice isn’t proposing to use corn for ethanol or “clean coal” or some other such bogus, industry-backed, psuedo-progressive approach to alternative energy like, unlike most so-called progressive politicians.
Regarding whattheheck:
There are also people who think that PCBs and DDT are harmless to humans. And, while they may rightfully discount most of the scientific evidence to the contrary, most scientists in the field would yeild to the huge weight of evidence that the chemicals are very likely to be harmful to humans. You can play it safe (even though you can’t be absolutely certain it necessary) or be reckless (throwing caution to the wind).
A few simple stats: over the last 650000 years the CO2 level has varied between 180 and 300ppm. In the last 150 years humans have increased CO2 levels from 282 to 383ppm—well beyond the naturally occuring maximum. Of course climate change is far more complicated than a simple CO2 cycle, but temperatures have followed the CO2 level throughout studied geological history. Anyone who disregards that suggestion that CO2 levels rising well above historical levels creates dangerous situation in that temperatures as well may exceed historical levels despite whatever the natural cycle we are in would cause is a reckless fool and a blight on humanity. The fact that the anthropogenic CO2 shift has occurred in a tiny fraction of the time such a change usually takes makes the short and long term changes we may be facing unpredictable and ought to be quite alarming. It’s not just another vote-getting issue. More to your point, the solution(s) are also solutions to economic and social issues and may be passable under the title of climate change mitigation than they would be under the headings of social welfare or taxation.
“Separation of church and state
beersnob, I quite agree with you. What’s more, I think the Bible has been a tool used for many years to make people accept the unacceptable. The notion that a god chose a particular people from the many tribes to talk to is quite discouraging. The notion that all the creation was just something for man to use as he pleased is such a big mistake we are bound to pay for it. We are part of nature, not nature’s masters as we are constantly reminded by the events we are facing now. The sooner we all develop a conscious about the results we are harvesting through our thoughtless and selfish attitudes, the bigger a chance of trying to reverse our situation.
register a new account »Posting Security