I made the claim that Dems think global warming is more a threat to the world than terrorism...
No response from liberals because it is correct and makes them look like the crazies that they are...
Scroll down to see the stories showing how wrong the global warming crowd is, and this story shows how wrong Dem's are about national security...
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Bill ties climate to national security
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
13 comments:
What a stupendous waste of time and money! If, in the course of natural events within military sessions devoted to addressing scenarios this type of imaginings takes place, that's one thing. But to devote any time and expense to issues based on the Goracle based alarmism is a great lack of intelligence and leadership on the part of Pentagon higher-ups. The one saving grace would be that these miltary minds, more likely to look at real possibilities rather than liberal fantasies, will see this "threat" for the heaping pile of steaming dung that it is.
Amen, brother!
Gosh Marshall,
Too bad the internet wasn't prevelant in the 80's, we could've made fun of their "ice age predictions". But hey, Algore says it's scary, and he's got many on the UN supporting him so it must be for real, I eaahhh!!.
I was going to buy some land in Montana and a Humvee so I could survive this eminent disaster befalling modern civilization, but I rembered that Humvee's are gas guzzlers, and country folk in Montana are conservative; now I don't know what the hell to do!
Maybe if I wring my hands, buy an electiric car and seperate the 2 litter coke bottles from the newspaper all will be well. DAMN, I feel better allready!
I haven't quite figured how an electric car, in winter, in Montana, is going to get me to needed supplies, but what the hay, at least I care!.
Jim has given up even trying to defense his wacko brothers...
I don't have to defend science to the likes of you.
Science? Please, please, enlighten!
No really, I care, contrary to what you may believe, I love the "great outdoors" and would hate to see it demolished.
Of course I expect you to answer all the very fine questions that's been asked concerning your "suppositions".
Ya, I know, that's the Achilles heal of the Globwarmskyisfalling movement, actually answering hard questions, Gasp, Squirm!
Again, I'm very interested. If I can't walk by the river every day, because of a bunch of conservative litterar?s', I'm going to be one pissed ombre'
Oh that's right, it's greedy factory owners that's keeping me from enjoying my daily walk. Them bastards!
I just heard a guy on the radio the other day. I really have to figure out a way to write the names down while I'm driving for the sake of the Goreites who can then look up the names and say their paid off by the oil companies.
Anyway, this guy, who has the creds to speak on the subject, spoke of how every warming period resulted in better crop yield on less land. So we need to guard against that horror. But since plants breathe that stuff, what happens when there's less of it for them?
Another thing he said was that much of this elevated level of CO2 was happening before the industrial age. I don't know how that can be but if true, blows the whole Goreacle nonsense right out of the water.
The worst part is, that this will lead to big government activity if the Goreites convince enough people that the sky is falling. Last night, I saw a replay of a debate between John Kerry and Newt Gingrich. MOre than a fight over the truth (or lack thereof) of the GW alarmism, it was a debate regarding how to deal with it. Kerry favored gov regs (big surprise) while Newt thought entreprenuershihp and incentives will get it done (not surprising either). A fool for the alarmism (as well as just being a fool), Kerry's position is based on the notion that time is running out.
To give Kerry some credit (and I just got a sharp pain in my chest for the mere suggestion), he did cite some stats regarding changes in the ecosystem on a lower end of the food chain level. I wouldn't begin to dispute this, but I would dispute whether or not it signifies the end of life as we know it. More than likely, it is the same changes that have occurred in every period of warming from the beginning of time. As the earth reverts to a cooling period, these losses will also reverse. And life will go on.
BTW. It's fucking snowing here in Chicagoland.
Snowing in April?! Yikes. How the hell can you stand it? Maybe you should start taking trips to the Southland in order to acclimate yourself to tropical temperatures - coming soon to a town near you.
Marshall,
In all seriousness, when you cut through all the crap, big government is what it’s all about, isn’t it?
Yes, sure you have the people that really believe (swallow) it. But the movers and the shakers have just latched on to GlobWarm as the latest vehicle in implementing that which they’ve been trying to do for decades. Well that’s not totally true, some are simply opportunist (Gore).
It’s all about the power baby, and I foresee an Orwellian society if this continues. They’re (oooo, the dreaded “they”) already trying to regulate/legislate what we say and think, what we eat, and now, yet again, how we live.
I don't doubt it, Blamin. The bottom line will most likely have some government involvement, but the private sector and market forces are what drives the best and most efficient developments. And there has to be a market or there will just be crap people are forced to buy because of the gov regs. Just think if there was a cool lookin', economical and quality performance electric car. They'd be all over the place and Shell and Citgo would be out of business. But so far, they suck, so we continue to buy what seems to be the best buy for our hard earned dollars. Add the government to the mix, and we end up having to buy some Yugo type piece of shit that no one is happy with.
Marshall,
What worries me is when they start adding GlobWarm surcharges to everyones power/gas bill. In most areas there's no competing going on between the power companies. Hence no competing going on. Do you remember all the elderly widows who died during the energy crises of the 70's? Well every time prices rise on monopoly energy co., people die. Every time prices rise significantly for any reason choices have to be made. And the poorest, most vulnerable amongst us suffer the most and that affects the elderly on fixed incomes more than any other group. Make no mistake - we the people will pay for any protacals bought about by this current hysteria.
Of course most don't look at all the potential circumstances when staking their position. I would even venture to say many global warming advocates are young mush-headed types that could care less about the overall effects unless of course it effects them personally.
Blamin,
The answer is easy! Just tax the rich! That solves everything, including making more people dependent upon the genius of lib asswipes.
Damn – the shear genius of it!!! It’s such a fantastic solution; why not apply it to every aspect of society? ANY problem can be fixed by more taxes on the rich! (well, that and a little “hate-crime” legislation)
Post a Comment