Ah, just wait. Watch how many people die of heat, cold, and starvation if the radical leftists get their way and wean us off of affordable and efficient energy. Hitler and Mao have nothing on these monsters.
It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy
Rick wrote: Ah, just wait. Watch how many people die of heat, cold, and starvation if the radical leftists get their way and wean us off of affordable and efficient energy. Hitler and Mao have nothing on these monsters.
You want to know why people like Driver8 and myself don't post here more often? It's posts like this, where "the other side" is verbally denigrated. You say you want discussion, then post stuff like this. If you truly want to hear "what the other side has to say," then perhaps be a little more civil?
I think that global warming is real, and that if we, as a species, don't curtail our fossil fuel energy dependency, we will leave a shitty problem for our children and grandchildren. Can you remember reading ScienceChic's extensive posts about this problem?
I also think that we, as a species, can fix the fossil fuel dependency without making green energy more expensive than fossil fuels. Apparently, you don't believe in American ingenuity? I honestly don't understand how people are so against the switch to green energy. I'm starting to think that it's because green energy has become a political football, and supporting it will give the Dems a win.
If the climate is warming, as you argue, what is detrimental? Colorado would become the next Southern California, they have the ocean, we have the mountains.
Will Obama's home on Martha's Vineyard be underwater? Heaven's to Betsy.
Will there be a greater harvest of grain crops? Yes. Is that bad?
Please tell us what is the future faced by grandchildren because of climate warming.
Great point. Iceland loves being able to grow cereals. Oceans rising? Plymouth Rock is still above water despite decades of warming. Guess President Obama's seaside mansion is safe.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
ramage wrote: If the climate is warming, as you argue, what is detrimental? Colorado would become the next Southern California, they have the ocean, we have the mountains.
Will Obama's home on Martha's Vineyard be underwater? Heaven's to Betsy.
Will there be a greater harvest of grain crops? Yes. Is that bad?
Please tell us what is the future faced by grandchildren because of climate warming.
You've never read any of ScienceChic's posts about climate change? Really? You could search on this board for her thoughts - and facts - about this situation.
Here's some info from NASA. You can also google a lot of information from reputable sources.
Some changes (such as droughts, wildfires, and extreme rainfall) are happening faster than scientists previously assessed. In fact, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — the United Nations body established to assess the science related to climate change — modern humans have never before seen the observed changes in our global climate, and some of these changes are irreversible over the next hundreds to thousands of years.
Scientists have high confidence that global temperatures will continue to rise for many decades, mainly due to greenhouse gases produced by human activities.
So to cut back on the consumption of fossil fuels, do you support carrot or stick means?
And what about other nations? Do we refuse to do business with China and India if they continue to build new coal fired power plants? Or must the West make all the sacrifices to our standard of living?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.