McCain’s “climate change” tour bypasses cooler heads
John McCain kicks off his “climate change tour” in Portland today. The Associated Press regurgitates the McCain emphasis on how he will push “free-market principles” to reduce global warming, which he is convinced is real and primarily man-made. (Update: Allahpundit’s got the new accompanying campaign ad.)
Take this with a gi-normous grain of salt, my friends:
In remarks prepared for delivery Monday at a Portland, Ore., wind turbine manufacturer, the presidential contender says expanded nuclear power must be considered to reduce carbon-fuel emissions. He also sets a goal that by 2050, the country will reduce carbon emissions to a level 60 percent below that emitted in 1990.
“For all of the last century, the profit motive basically led in one direction – toward machines, methods and industries that used oil and gas,” said McCain. “Enormous good came from that industrial growth, and we are all the beneficiaries of the national prosperity it built. But there were costs we weren’t counting, and often hardly noticed. And these terrible costs have added up now, in the atmosphere, in the oceans and all across the natural world.”
The Arizona senator promised to challenge China and India, two economic rivals who are fueling their challenge to U.S. market supremacy with heavily polluting fuels such as coal, gas and oil.
“For all of its historical disregard of environmental standards, it cannot have escaped the attention of the Chinese regime that China’s skies are dangerously polluted, its beautiful rivers are dying, its grasslands vanishing, its coastlines receding and its own glaciers melting,” said McCain.He also took a swipe at President Bush, who balked at the beginning of its term at signing the Kyoto global warming protocols. McCain said he would return to the negotiating table.
“I will not shirk the mantle of leadership that the United States bears. I will not permit eight long years to pass without serious action on serious challenges. I will not accept the same dead-end of failed diplomacy that claimed Kyoto. The United States will lead and will lead with a different approach – an approach that speaks to the interests and obligations of every nation,” he said.
A rational, free-market-based approach to environmentalism requires a commitment to scientific truth, accuracy, and honest cost-benefit analyses.
For the last several years, McCain has been committed to none of those.
Climatologist Patrick Michaels had McCain pegged four years ago, when The Maaaveerrick convened ridiculously, eco-Chicken Little-stacked hearings:
Recent U.S. Senate hearings into alleged global warming, chaired by Arizona Republican John McCain, were among the “most biased” that a noted climatologist has ever seen – “much less balanced than anything I saw in the Clinton administration,” he said.
Patrick J. Michaels is the author of a new book “Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media.” He is an environmental sciences professor at the University of Virginia who believes that claims of human-caused “global warming” are scientifically unfounded.
Michaels spoke with CNSNews.com Thursday following a panel discussion sponsored by the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., where Michaels also serves as a senior fellow in environmental studies.
“John McCain, a Republican, has probably held the most biased hearing of all,” Michaels said. McCain is a big proponent of limiting greenhouse gas emissions, which he believes are causing “global warming.” The Arizona senator also “is trying to define himself as an environmental Republican, which he is going to use to differentiate himself from his rivals for the (presidential) nomination in 2008,” according to Michaels.
You can bet McCain won’t be visiting with Michaels on his climate change tour anytime soon. The truth would get in the way of his crusade:
Citing a visit he had to the Arctic with several U.S. senators last summer, McCain made it clear that he believed human-caused “global warming” was a certainty.
“It was remarkable going up on a small ship next to this glacier and seeing where it had been just 10 short years ago and how quickly it’s receded,” McCain told the New York Times…
…McCain also warned about what he saw as the rapid pace of Arctic warming, evidenced by the arrival of wildlife that had never previously been seen in the region. “The Inuit language for 10,000 years never had a word for robin and now there are robins all over their villages,” he told the Times.
Michaels refuted McCain’s assertions about the North Pole, noting that the Arctic has actually been warmer in the past than it is now.
“It was warmer 4 to 7,000 years ago [in the Arctic.] Every climatologist knows that. I saw no mention of that in the Arctic report that was paraded in front of McCain,” Michaels said. He added that the past warming of the Arctic couldn’t possibly be blamed on greenhouse gas emissions since it occurred long before the industrial era.
In 2003, Iain Murray debunked McCain’s anecdote about how he got interested in global warming:
He is on record as saying that the reason he became interested in global warming in the first place is because he recognized how much hotter it was getting at his home in Sedona, Ariz. Unfortunately, the data don’t back him up on this. If we look at the temperature records from the nearby Childs weather station, we can actually see a downward trend in temperature of slightly over 1° F. since 1986, when McCain was elected to the Senate. Another nearby station, Fort Valley, shows a very slight upwards trend. You can see these trends for yourself by looking at the official records available at the CO2science.org website. Certainly there are upward trends elsewhere in Arizona, but these are balanced by downward trends — Tucson has cooled while Tombstone has warmed. Arizona makes a poor poster boy for global-warming theory.
Like Barack Obama, McCain touts a “cap-and-trade” system as the free-market answer to reducing carbon emissions. Analysts who haven’t been bitten by the global warming alarmist bug beg to differ–and evidence from cap-and-trade systems already in operation back them up:
….the world has already witnessed many unpleasant surprises with Europe’s ongoing efforts to impose a cap and trade program under the Kyoto Protocol, the international climate treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
In fact, European efforts have racked up significant costs while failing to reduce emissions. Nearly every European country participating has higher emissions today than when the treaty was first signed in 1997. Further, despite ongoing criticism of the United States from Kyoto parties for failing to ratify the treaty, emissions in many of these nations are actually rising faster than in the United States.
The European experience also shows the problem of cap and trade fraud.[6] None other than Enron’s Ken Lay was a strong supporter of carbon cap and trade when the idea was first floated in the 1990s, saying that it could “do more to promote Enron’s business than almost any other regulatory initiative.” These carbon allowances that will be bought and sold have a value estimated at $50 billion to $300 billion annually, and the trade in them would be a huge new business. Enron may be gone, but others ready to take advantage of cap and trade–often at public expense–are not.
Is the solution to go back to 1910 and live like Haiti and Somalia? The Appeal-Democrat says no:
Here’s good news that may have escaped attention. The environment worldwide is getting better and better, largely because of economic growth, efficiency and innovation. So says the 2008 Index of Leading Environmental Indicators, an annual report on worldwide air and water quality and climate change by the Pacific Research Institute, a San Francisco free-market think tank.
While government regulation plays a “central role” in improving the environment, PRI says, it would be ineffective if it were not for affluence and technological advances. That may be why PRI also warns that imposing drastic measures to curb manmade greenhouse gas emissions could roll back the very economic and technological gains essential to improving the environment.
For example, to reach the global warming alarmists’ goal — an 80-percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 — the United States would have to revert to a per-capita emission rate last seen in 1910. Considering the nation’s population will increase to 420 million by 2050, the per-capita rate would have to roll back even more, to a level “not seen in the nation since 1875.”
For perspective, “unless there is a genuine breakthrough in carbon-free electricity,” PRI concludes, “households will not be able to use enough electricity to run a hot-water heater without exceeding” the per-capita emission limit.
The only countries with greenhouse gas emissions that low “are desperately poor nations, such as Haiti and Somalia,” wrote PRI’s senior fellow of environmental studies Steven F. Hayward. “Automobile fuel consumption will have to fall by more than 80 percent.”
…”The 80 percent reduction target is unrealistic at any price,” PRI concludes. Given the option of continued innovation and technological advances inherent in economic growth versus the economy-retarding Draconian limits on greenhouse gas emissions, it seems clear to us which one is preferable. Swedish environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg has made the same case for years.
In arriving at the “Copenhagen Consensus” in 2006, Lomborg asked 24 U.N. ambassadors from nations including China, India and the U.S. to set priorities for solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. “They looked at what spending money to combat climate change and other major problems could achieve,” Mr. Lomborg wrote in the Wall Street Journal. “They found that the world should prioritize the need for better health, nutrition, water, sanitation and education, long before we turn our attention to the costly mitigation of global warning.”
…
Whether one believes greenhouse gases pose an environmental threat, the greater point is that the United States is capable of such a reduction because of its economic, technological and innovative advances. But blindly imposing government mandates without regard to their effect on the economy, technology and innovation will do little except inhibit prosperity and move the nation closer to the model of Haiti and Somalia.
As Lomborg has written: “We all want a better world. But we must not let ourselves be swept up in making a bad investment, simply because we have been scared by sensationalist headlines.”
A true “free-market” approach to environmentalism means protecting the free market, not destroying it in the name of supposedly “cost-free solutions” to a supposed crisis that rests on skewed science.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Bent Notes » Blog Archive » Sometimes the guy I’ll be voting for comes across as downright stupid - today’s edition
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » New McCain ad: Let’s fight global warming, but in a good way
- All American Blogger » Half Hour Podcast Today
- IS IT 5 O’CLOCK YET? | Democrat=Socialist
- Pro Cynic
- Mike Huckabee as VP? Disaster. | The Daily Conservative
- McCain Adopts The Socialist Plan For National Economic and Cultural Suicide « Sword At-The-Ready
- southchild » Blog Archive » GOP Crap and Trade
- Democrat=Socialist
- Michelle Malkin » The problem with McCain’s Big Vision Thing speech
- Pity Party of upcoming Fall Election « Kevin’s Korner
- Michelle Malkin » Worst. Republican. Senator. Ever.
- Michelle Malkin » 31,072 scientists John McCain needs to talk to
- A Lot of Hot Gas… « Spoutingoff’s Blog
- Michelle Malkin » Back to business: Stop the cap-and-tax bill
- Back to business: Stop the cap-and-tax bill « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- Mike Huckabee as VP? Disaster. | TDC
- Michelle Malkin » Beware the Climate Change Republicans
- Michelle Malkin » Ugh: McCain & Company melting on cap-and-tax
- Michelle Malkin » What did I tell ya? Lindsay Graham signs on to cap-and-tax
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Enviro-nitwits, John McCain
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
American Thinker
» Sarah Palin and the low ebb of the cultural leftRedstate
» Morning Briefing for November 24, 2009Doug Ross @ Journal
» ACORN pwnage part II: Breitbart's BigGovt Lowers the BoomBig Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump ScandalVillainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Nice Deb
» O
And what is so entirely wrong with the profit motive?
Grr….
McCain is doing his level best to undermine his own party — again!
HAZMAT Suit. Stat!
Reality check: The US Senate unanimously voted down the Kyoto Treaty — in 1999! Last I checked McCain was there at the time, and Bush was still the Governor of Texas.
Straight Talk, my fat rear end!
Nobody is more skeptical of the Hubris of Human Induced Global Warming than me, but John McCain is the candidate most likely to wake up from the madness, and madness it is.
Triangulation: left of Hillary?
I’m sure China and India are chomping at the bit to get the the table to negotiate with McCain.
And, not just in regard to global climate change either.
Quick! Someone call The Goracle! He must have missed that “inconvenient truth.”
Blah Blah Blah…..
repeat: until they do something about the sewage from Tijuana dumping millions of gallons per day into the OCEAN for over ten years, they can kiss my rump.
Since he pretty well has the Republican nomination sewn up, he no longer needs Conservatives. He can start thumbing his nose at us again.
The only thing worse than McCain would be Obama.
How much is anybodys guess…
Where are you guys buying this belief that John McCain will do right by conservatives once in office and where can I buy some?
His penchant for telling conservatives to shove it is crystal clear yet there is this belief that he will somehow learn the error of his ways and repent.
I’m.Not.Buying.It.
Tell that to one of those tree hugging environmental fascists who would knife you to save the life of a bog turtle.
As an old science teacher, I made it a point that science is not about belief. It is about finding some degree of order in what often seems like a universe of disorder. The goal is to uncover the truth.
However science has often been hijacked by politicians and pseudoscientist who try to use science to justify their own preconceived notions. Galleleo had to deal with them, and real scientist today still have to deal with them. They are powerfull as they often control the purse strings. We have seen them Present evolution as a fact, that is blasphemy for any scientist to refute. We have seen them tell us DDT was more harmfull to humans than the malaria carrying mosquito itself. We have seen them tell us what medicine is acceptable (cut, burn or poison) and what medicine is quakery.
Now we are seeing them annoint “global warming” and CO2 as a pollutant as a fact.
I had to listen to Lieberman this morning tell me why McCain is such a brave man for accepting the FACT of global warming (despite the ignorance of Republican conservatives and of course REAL scientists).
I wonder when he goes to the table, if he will say “Hola, como estas?” ROFL
All joking aside…
I am a firm believer that the evironmentalist whackos Rush talks about, wont be happy until we’re living in huts with dirt floors and no lights.
And there’s no HAZMAT suit…manbearpig has been wearing over his fat behind for the last several years. We all get a poncho.
And they get the carbon credits for making us do just that.
You mean like penguins?
Every day, McCain comes out with something that makes me NOT to want to vote for him. Maybe his strategy is to reduce emissions by having all conservatives stay home on election day?
He may well succeed in that venture, joe.
You know…I started reading this but I couldn’t finish. I just can’t stand this guy!
Thats BS…I saw an article in American Thinker that blew that statement out of the
waterice.Here’s my favorite line from the AP coverage of the speech:
The essential John McCain: even if he’s wrong, he’s right, and everything and everyone else be damned.
Relax, McCain has an abysmal (great) record on environmental issues. Nobody on the left thinks McCain will act differently as President.
The links in the MM post were a pleasant trip down memory lane. Just 4 years ago there was an actual environmental scientist (not a real “professor”, but close) who said the data were incomplete. As more and more data streams in, more and more of these borderline holdouts have given up.
Also, if McCain thinks we can control the climate, why didn’t he prevent the tornados from devistating the south/midwest this past weekend?
makes me want to have a carbon footprint the size of montana. i’m spiteful like that
yeah and he doesn’t like water boarding either..what a fruitcake!
30 pieces of slver,
You said it. I did read some of the comments after I went to bed last night on the other McCain thread to effect that by voting Perot in 1992 got us 8 years of Clinton.
True.
But imagine what it would have been like if Bush I, the kinder gentler version of Juan MCCain, had been re-elected….we would have had to put up with a slow-motion version of Clinton on policy matters and even less respect of the conservative base of the party.
More to the point and I think this to be critical: You would have had more and more of the conservative organizations, talk radio etc. in the tankfor RINOs, and the critcism for them would have died…This is what is happening right now at Fox News.
The investigative stuff that should be hurled at McCain is barely noticed now RE: Illegal Immigration, global warming, campaign finance reform.
Now picture this happening for 4 years at least…the guy who is supposed to be with us but isn’t, reaches over BLATANTLY to liberals and in effect does their dirty work for them.
Now further picture how hard Fox News, rush Limbaugh, et al will really go after McCain once he does this stuff…it won’t be half as hard as it is with a Democrat in office.
Yes Clinton made it to office, but within 2 years he was rendered a lame duck on social issues, gun control, etc. (Bush I would have done the same thing as Clinton on the Assault WEapon bAN, JUST MORE QUIETLY with the likes of Talk Radio’s finest like Limbaugh spending half their time fawning over Bush I.)
Oh and by the way we had 12 years of REpublican control of congress as a result to the frustration of the Democrats
AGW is the biggest fraud ever.
The Global Climate is Cyclic. Like Election years here in the USA.
Every 4 Years some dumb ass trys to sell US a new line of BS.
Al Bore is a loser. Obama and Clinton are opportunistic marxist racists. Mc Cain thinks that it is his turn.
How sad for Us. Between support for La Raza, 57 States and Snipers in Bosnia, I am totally disgusted.
None of those opportunistic whores are fit for Office.
Just my take on it.
That does it! I’m staying home!
The AP’s report on McCain’s speech in Portland says, “[McCain] also took a swipe at President Bush, who balked at the beginning of [Bush's] term at signing the Kyoto global warming protocols. McCain said he would return to the negotiating table.”
That Kyoto falsehood is perpetuated by the MSM almost on a daily basis.
In fact, President Bush did exactly the same thing President Clinton did.
Kyoto was negotiated under Clinton.
Clinton did not submit Kyoto to the US Senate because the Senate indicated it would REJECT Kyoto by a 98-0 vote!
When Bush came into office, there was no Senate approved treaty for him to sign!
Exactly like Clinton, Bush chose not to submit Kyoto to the Senate because the Senate would have rejected it by a crushing majority.
While I don’t like McCain, Cheryl, I would suggest that you go to the polls in November and cast your votes on things below the top slot on the ballot.
There are offices up for election that are on the federal, state and local levels that could use some attention from us too.
For sure Barry – but I do think these 3 knuckleheads are just a symptom of what’s wrong with our country. I cannot, in clear conscience, vote for any one of them. I will however, do as you suggest!
This is a good point. Hopefully Michelle will keep a list of conservatives worthy of our votes.
And of course, holding ones nose or not, a vote for McCain is an endorsement of McCain.
something like this miss?
Pander, pander, pander. Once again Juan sucks up to the wool socks n’ Birkenstocks crowd on the Left coast ! He SO does not represent my point of view. Portland has become a Socialist Utopia like San Fran. You can have it Juan……..
My sister the aging liberal lefty has NEVER voted for anyone but a Demoncrat. Yesterday she told me she is voting for McCain.
She will go to her grave having never voted for a Republican.
It is easier to just accept that you are voting against Obama and marxism, tends to make the days easier.
Get ready for some global cooling. The Chilean volcanic eruption will, like the Mt. St. Helens eruption, cause global cooling for a couple of years. Somehow, I don’t think that anybody has consulted Gaia about her carbon footprint lately.
McCan’t is so like last week with his MMGW. He needs to get hip to the new mantra: Man Made Climate Change!!! Now when we have below average winter temps refuting MMGW like we did this past winter, the MSM is now substituting MMCC!!! So they ecowhackos can never be wrong!
This is what comes from being an ignorant doofus and relying upon the ‘advice’ of others.
The hoax exposed:
http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html#top
McInsane is dangerous and he shows it every single day.
#37; You’re so right ! When the “illness” does not fit the original prognosis, they keep changing the symptoms . One way or another, its gonna be “all our fault”. Because they said so !
I will NOT vote for a moron, a fool, or a knave. So that rules out all three.
ditto longbow – I’m going to leave that part of the ballot blank.
So, where’s all this Glo-Bull Warming I keep hearing about? It’s the middle of May in Northern Virginia just outside the beltway, raining and I have to wear a jacket?
Here are some of the questions no “man-made global warming will destroy the planet advocate” can answer:
1. what % of global warming is made man
2. what % of global warming can man reverse
3. what is the economic cost for each 1% of global warming man reverses
4. what does the graph of 3. look like
5. what is the damage to the planet of global warming
And there are many similar questions. No one is willing or able to quantify the global warming issue. I’m especially concerned about the economic costs in “fighting” it. How much suffering and death is to be inflicted to lower the air temperature 0.1 degree F? And is it worth it? Seems no one is considering this question.
I would like to leave my carbon footprint on McCain’s arse! What a tool! Other than that, I have no strong feelings.
I know it’s been said before, but –
Boy, are we in a lot of trouble. I reiterate my position: There is no way in hell I’m going to vote for John McCain, not against Clinton, Obama, or Osama bin Laden. If we’re going to Hell, we might as well have a Democrat to blame it on.
Oops. That’s 1. what % of global warming is MAN MADE. not MADE MAN. LOL
And the sweeping answer McCain gives, what if it’s a real crisis and we do nothing, so we better do something, that’s no answer at all. That’s not an affirmative position. It’s just stupid! Yeah, saddle the economy with crushing regulations for what might be, for “what if the sky is falling”. No!
aj,
Its only 25 million gallons daily, whats the problem? Just pick the turds up by the clean end like our three candidates advocate.
He’s talked about combatting global warming and the globe is responding! Let’s be very careful about questioning that kind of influence.
If you’re a professor at one of these “schools” across America you have to justify your spot at the school with research and publications. Most of the time the money needed for research is through NSF grants, meaning it leaves professors begging grant money whether they believe it’s junk science or not.
I would not be surprised if McCain is being lobbied by these pseudoscientists.
I just spit my coffee on my monitor, thanks ROFLMAO
Psst… of all the fuels being used and developed so far for cars….oil affects green house emissions the least……. wanna bet you don’t hear that? My HAZMAT suit is inspected and ready 30 Pcs……. I’ll get ya one.
McCain should know that it was hotter in the Artic 4-7000 years ago than it is now. After all, he was there.
use this instead of a hazmat suit, even equipped with TP.
Bubble suit
Lesser of Two Evils -anyone!!!
The Slow Boil to Socialism – anyone?!
This “froggy” is jumping out!
I stand completely corrected Aloha.
Look, if it was PC to tattoo an anarchy symbol on your forehead, McCain would do it if he thought it would get a vote. Once elected, he’d wash that marker-pen tattoo right off.
People should understand hydrogen cars get their hydrogen through an energy conversion process, such as in passing an electric current through water. And where do you get that electricity? Coal, oil, gas, or nuclear. But since it goes thru an extra step, and the 1st law of thermodynamics says (IIRC) that heat and energy are lost when you go thru such an extra step, I have to wonder if it is in fact a LESS efficient mode of energy. Yes its only byproduct is water, but what about the coal burned to create the energy to extract the water from hydrogen in the first place? Sure we can manufacture hydrogen in Utah and the car will run in Los Angeles and the air there will be cleaner, but, don’t pretend there’s no pollution associated with a hydrogen-powered car. There may be more pollution.
I am sad to say that I worry that he forgot!
Ask any of these eviroweenies what the climate of the Earth is supposed to be. If you even get an answer, it will be as easy as pie to shoot it down.
I tested this theory with my liberal friend. I told him how Iowa had the coldest winter on record. Of course he resonded by talking about the problems of Climate Change
#48:
Please! those aren’t turds, they’re “sewer trout“.
Free Market Principles. This is a great example of John McCain newspeak. It operates under precisely the same principle by which North Korea can be considered a Democratic People’s Republic.
It also brings up the old Henry Ford quote about being allowed to have your car in any color you want so long as it’s black. Well under McCain’s principles the market can make any decision it wants so long as it is precisely the one he sanctions. This is not a curtailment on freedom because, as any good dictator can tell you, the other choices are against your best interests and only a person not of sound mind would choose the option not in his best interests.
Yes, the market will be perfectly free under McCain’s environmental regulations except when its path deviates from the correct one, in which case in order to preserve its future freedom to follow the one correct path it may need to be disciplined and repositioned such that unfavorable deviations cease to continue.
While our “leaders” are saving us from the sky falling and global warming there is much real stuff to do. In fact there are 36,000 bad boys that are part of the toxic waste sites problem. Remember back to 1980 and the superfund sites that by government mandate are scheduled for clean up.
Superfund sites are the nation’s worst toxic waste sites: 1,305 are scheduled for cleanup on the National Priorities List (NPL). About 11 million people in the U.S., including 3-4 million children, live within 1 mile of a federal Superfund site and confront potential public health risks.
Here’s a map of the toxic sites in America (click for best results).
Superfund toxic waste sites is not the subject of this thread but far more a real environmental problem than global warming. If you live on the mid-east American coast you can put a fork in yourself because your done.
The save the planet movement is designed to destroy our country and eliminate freedom. Fact.
Al Gore doesn’t want to run for POTUS because he can garner more cash no matter which of the 3 buffoons get elected. Plus, who wants to be Prez when they can be a living deity?
Climate Change, or as normal people know it: Summer, Autumn, Winter, Spring.
We have had these kind of scientific fads ever since money began dictating the direction of scientific research. Remember when a lot of talking heads predicted that AIDS would break out of the high-risk groups and wipe us all out within a generation? Or that bird flu would morph into a pandemic that would wipe us all out? It seems that the line between science fiction and science has become blurred lately.
tbear44 #67,
Absolutely. Common sense arguement for anyone. The angle of the planet to the sun can effect the temp. this severly. IMHO, I am surprised there is not more variation in the year-to-year mean temperatures.
I am still waiting!!! Again, Where’s the proof???
OOO Gore said it, Moore said it, it makes no sense, 100,000 year temperature variation charts show warming is normal.
AHHH therefore it is true!!! (leftie logic)
Let’s be fair to Senator McCain.
His plan to bring down oil prices is certainly different.
I got a name for you all…..
Stanley Meyer, look him up and you will see the technology of the future. He is now dead due to food poisoning. He is reported as saying that the Arabs offered him 1 billion dollars to not continue with his research. He was also offered money by big oil to not continue with his research.
His methods have been duplicated by others so I would assume it’s only a matter of time before they are dead to.
I’m going to vote for “None of the Above” this year.
I won’t be part of any of the three eminent disasters awaiting this country. They all suck and suck badly.
Voting for the one that sucks the least just sucks even more.
We might as well suck it up and put up with however long it will take to replace the current crop of RINOs in Washington or the next revolution starts. I’m thinking the latter will start begin first.
BTW.
Also look up Denny Klein for water powered cars.
No Kyoto, no Kyoto, no Kyoto….. do you get it yet, McShame?
Oh well…
Sometime in not too distant future, I’ll be the one who’s saying: I tol’ja’ so…I tried to warn ya’.
[sigh]
Enviroment: 4%
[giggle]
Was he there 10 years ago or did someone with a Special Interest hand him a map and tell him so?
20 years ago was the glacier smaller then what is was 10 years ago, or was it 5 years ago that it was a half of a half but plus a quarter larger.
Does McCain remember what party is he running out of, or did he totally forget?
I just don’t think ya’ll have a grasp of how serious this issue is. Did you not read about the earth quake in China. Come on…get informed
But, don’tcha’ unnerstan’?
An issue, that consumes 4% of the electorate deserves a big screaming headline.
And, don’tchew fergeddit
On May 12th, 2008 at 11:03 am, Mister P has it right. More junk science to kill millions, just as he stated about DDT and Rachael Carson, mass murderer that she was. Actually people are still dieing due to the prohibition on DDT in some places of the world. Which has been determined to be safe for use around humans. More junk science gone a muck because of politics, money and consensus of idiots.
Hop aboard Juan McShame
Galloping glaciers
From the article;
Just keep swallowing the liberal BS Mc Nasty
I’m not too familiar with his voting record, but maybe we have hope with this guy:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080512174415.16yxf74a&show_article=1
“Tax incentives to conserve.”
It’s evil – EVIL, I tell ya’.
I WANT higher taxes and MORE gov’t regulation.
Global warming caused by man is real.
But, socialism isn’t the cure.
Whenever lefties mix government and global warming, it just makes my job harder.
Data please. What I’ve seen the ‘warming’ part isn’t true.
The first time I read about the ‘Carbon Credits’ I thought it was an Onion Parody… Biggest hoodwink ever served up.
Global Cooling was just 25-30 years ago and was going to wipe out the planet… now their supposed Warming is going to wipe out the planet.
But I NEVER thought conservatives would get swept up in this tripe. This past few months has been like living in a Twighlight Zone episode.
Dumb candidate, really dumb candidate. I don’t vote for dumb candidates.
I say prove it dumbo, prove it. And don’t give me a computer model, give me some facts.
Last straw.
McCain has lost me in total with his GW position. What a hardheaded dumb cluck!
I wouldn’t vote for the guy if ya held a gun on me.
I’m going to dig some worms and go fishing.
allrsn said (#71):
People sometimes complain that I don’t give arguments or sources. But when I do you just ignore them so what’s the point? Can’t do anything about willful ignorance.
Silkyinfamous said (#79):
The vanishing glacier stories are true. You can argue about other temperature data, but Greenland, the Arctic ocean, and the worlds most famous glaciers have being photographed.
The answer is staring us in the face: How can anthropogenic carbon emissions global warming account for global warm periods prior to the widespread use of carbon-emitting fuels by man? How?
Time travel, of course! We need a Manhattan project to do carbon capture and then send the captured carbon — and Manbearpig — back in time where it — and he — can do no harm to the future because it — and he — is doing the harm in the past!
Nothing could possibly go wrong with this plan!
or maybe the Philadelphia Experiment
I have no problem with the free market being allowed to build nuke energy reactors, windmills and photovoltaic cells for reducing our dependence on the AaaRabs for the oil. Truth is, we’re funding the Muslims and their behavior, in part, because of this mickey-mouse crap on the part of the environmentalists stopping the nuclear alternative (which, by far, will have the most impact). More energy efficient cars would help, too–this shouldn’t be a political principle liberals get credit for. This is a national security issue. Get governmental interference out of the way for oil exploration. I guarantee you, the rest of the world could give a hoot if we hold back from the exploration–they’ll take the oil and run with it.
But, IF CO2 is causing “global climate change” or whatever the current word is, will someone please show me the data for the corresponding biomass growth and carbon fixation that has to be the result? I’ll believe a lot more in the theory if someone shows me the growth data, which would REALLY be nature’s solution to the “warming” anyway. The truth is, fire suppression is probably more a result of why North America is much greener than it ever was in the past, rather than all of the whoopla over CO2 emissions.
Frankie is so brilliant, he only cares about opinion polls, and not what the Global Warming HOAX is going to end up costing taxpayers.
Hey Frankie, ever wonder about the sanity of a man who is SO focused on issues that the populace say are 11% and 4% of what they care about?
You better stop shining so bright, you’re causing Global Warming!
If McCains has his way on immigration, America’s population in 2050 will be double what it was in 1990. I’d love to see what magic he’s going to work in order to double the population while lowering carbon emission.
Of course, none of his buddies in the press will ask such awkard questions.