Sen. Jeff Sessions Tells Global Warming Alarmists To Cool It
And Sessions gives good reasons why.
I enjoy being able to keep this man in office as a voter in the Birmingham area.
I enjoy being able to keep this man in office as a voter in the Birmingham area.
I love it when I start a thread.
Every word posted appears in my email.
Until there is actually evidence of a problem - or a substantially more supported hypothesis - I don't think any action is warranted - private or public. I can't necessarily rule out a public solution, but it is definitely a last resort in my book for just about any problem.
What I'm saying is that I ALSO have grown to recognize that, not having discovered any 'silver bullets,' Believers are not swayed from their beliefs by pretty much ANY dose of logic, reasoning or facts. I was recently watching Christopher Hitchens' videos on YouTube, and he's essentially butting his head against the same 'billion-kilowatt dams' in his own way.
But maybe some of our "High Hopes" will bear fruit. For me, it's my second-favorite indoor sport.
I agree with the science, but disagree with state controlled solutions. It is not necessary to deny the science just to object to the political motives.
Saw that quote in some movie, whatever that was.
The setting was in Africa.
Think Bruce Willis was in it but I may be wrong.
I could try to find that.
Naw!
The most important correlation is the link between CO2 and sea level. Not much else is relevant.
Gathering more data will not create a more accurate model. In any case, any model would just be joining the race to make another (worthless) prediction.
--a quote from whoever said that.
That would interfere with the policy of "we have to pass the Bill, to find out what is in it".
The reality is that trying to predict the weather or climate has so many variables that it is nearly impossible. What we really ought to do is spend the next 1000 years gathering data so that we can put together a model. Maybe by that time we'll have enough information that we can actually correlate changes and attempt to explain what is going on.
I agree that there are going to be some who will choose to support their biases and agendas over reality, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to influence those who really do want to do the right thing. If we do nothing, we will automatically fail.
Let's see the results of Sessions' presentation...
Did/Will Anything Change?
as fast as it should! -- j
http://patriotupdate.com/cartoons/follow...
I'm less concerned about global warming, as I am about the pollution aspect of fossil fuels. I don't think there is anything wrong with using technology to build it better/faster/cheaper, but picking up the religious jihad on it on one side or the other seems foolish too. Whenever you look at the donors, you see pretty obviously that someone else has something to gain too... Think to coal & oil industry are 'thrilled' about renewable sources of fuel? Think the power utilities are happy if 20-40% of their customers go away and produce their own power on-site? It's foolish to think that those interest groups are not on the other side of the global warming debate either... Although its not so much about "global warming is a hoax" as "we need the revenue so distract the attention elsewhere".
Second, there are a plethora of professional climatologists who are AGW, and many more who are 'Lukewarmers' (think that there is a small amount of man-made GW but that it is doing more good than harm). If you would like to browse, please go to wattsupwiththat.com.
My personal position is that the temperature fluctuations that we are experiencing are part of the normal climate process and that our increased CO2 has virtually no effect. I am definitely not a Warmist; I am not an Icer - but I am keeping an eye on that possibility.
Jan
Load more comments...