So, SUVs have never jumped out in front of you? Camry’s? Hummers?
BTW, no one is going to keep you from buying a truck you need for work. At least you need it, unlike the Hummer owners who fight the rugged terrain of the mall parking lot.
Agree. How do you know if you are not thinking critically? If you are unwilling to risk your beliefs, you are not thinking critically.
Global warming is a fact, so fucking what. Bush didn’t cause it, and years of Pubbie denial ain’t gonna change anything. It’s been happening for generations, and Al Gore’s bullshit is not going to change shit either.
HUMANS are responsible for global warming, not Republicans. I am not giving up my computer because of global warming, and I am not going to ride a fucking bicycle to work, or buy a toy car that gets 200 miles per gallon, or turn off every light in my house to sit by one 40 watt energy-saving bulb, and neither will most other people.
And in the next 20 or 30 years, China, India et al are going to spew more shit into the atmosphere than the US or any other current industrialized nations combined have done since the Industrial Revolution. And they aren’t going to give a shit either, just like we didn’t. “It’s our turn now!”
Shit happens, and feel good crap like Kyoto and such isn’t going to make a damn bit of difference since the emerging industrial nations now want their piece of the pie, and believe me, even if they sign treaties and shit, they don’t give a rat’s ass.
And I am not a raging right wing denier, yes, GLOBAL WARMING IS A FACT AND BUSH SUCKS, but I just don’t think anything will change because of a movie or feel good treaties.
IT’S TOO LATE! HEAD FOR THE HILLS!
Well, the second half sure wasn’t worth watching. Much like tonight’s game.
Seeing as you’re willfully ignorant, I’d go bible if I were you. I wouldn’t want to upset your carefully propped up world view.
Your comments about global warming are spot on, and no matter what we may do, second- and third-world countries will pick up our slack in creating our own demise.
Likewise, I’m not about to bike to work if I can help it, but as demand for oil increases world-wide thanks to the aforementioned industrial revolutions spreading all over the world, the prices of fuel will continue to skyrocket, and suddenly that toy car looks a lot more attractive when gas hits $8/gallon.
Perhaps you are the one who is ignorant. I imagine that brainwashed people tend to perceive that it’s the other guy who is ignorant.
Are you willing to risk your beliefs?
I would ask (1) are you a scientist who is an expert in the field of climatology; and (2) do you agree that Richard Lindzen is a scientist who is an expert in the field of climatology?; and (3) do you believe you know better than Richard Lindzen?
I normally think of potbangers as individuals, not corporate entities. But yeah, I would say that the potbangers are involved.
I would ask you (1) does Richard Lindzen know better than the 99% of climatologists who support the idea of AGW? You’re just like a creationist–treat a couple of fringe scientists as though their every pronouncement was ex cathedra and then ignore the overwhelming scientific consensus that is opposed to them.
Would this be the same Richard Lindzen who, and I quote an article in Harpers in 95, charged “oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; [and] his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western Fuels and a speech he wrote, entitled ‘Global Warming: the Origin and Nature of Alleged Scientific Consensus,’ was underwritten by OPEC.”
Because he sounds like a hack to me.
I don’t know if it’s 99% (am I allowed to demand cites in this forum?), but I would say that yes, he probably does.
That’s false, but anyway, you are completely missing the point. Why not answer my questions? I answered yours.
Ok, so you know better than him?
Is there some kind of voodoo ignorance-magnet curse on this thread?
Well, sure. He agrees with you.
Here is a list of scientists that I think are correct, despite the alleged “consensus”
Scientists who think that I am handsome
Scientists who have determined that I will marry Natalie Portman
Scientists hard at work on the personal jet pack
I’m not sure what your point is.
However, I will explain my point: What Exit seemed to be arguing that there was a certain arrogance in my position – that I, a layman, seemed to think that I knew better than a group of scientists. My point is that this argument can be turned on it’s head: What Exit, who is apparently a layman, seems to feel that he knows better than a different group of scientists.
Now, you might argue that one group of scientists is substantially larger than the other and therefore more worthy of belief. But that’s a different argument.
I was just arguing that I want to fly off with Natalie Portman in a jetpack.
Try to keep up.
Really? What makes his say-so better than the consensus of the scientific community? Do you also think Michael Behe’s say-so outweighs the consensus of the community of evolutionary biologists? It sounds like you are just cherry-picking scientists who agree with your position.
I am not qualified to answer questions about AGW. In areas where I lack expertise, I defer to the consensus of experts. And the consensus of experts is that you are full of shit. Yet apparently God whispered in your ear that they are all wrong, so we should listen to you instead of them. Christ, you’re as bad as lekatt.
[Al Gore] One jetpack running for 30 seconds puts out twice the yearly emissions of an average SUV. For shame. [/Al Gore]
Richard Lindzen says that jetpack-induced vibrations make flowers bloom.
Especially Natalie Portman’s flower.
As a layman, who am I to disagree?