# Thanks AGW deniers! We were getting tired of all those trees! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 27, 2012, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462 "2012-06-27T14:22:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![EmAnJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d2c977/32.png) [@EmAnJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EmAnJ)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/41 "2012-06-27T21:29:15Z")
But still, I am not convinced this is the fault of AGW deniers! ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/42 "2012-06-27T21:41:42Z")
[QUOTE=GIGObuster] History shows otherwise, many bills and changes proposed have been stopped by people like Inhofe in the senate by relying on flawed science furnished by deniers. [/QUOTE] Never said otherwise, but, again, what would be different? Would we be building nuclear power plants like crazy if there were no deniers? Would we be building solar and wind plants like crazy as well? Would we be replacing a large portion of our automobiles with CO2 free vehicles? When would all this be happening…and how would we be affording it? I have no doubt that denier types have made a non-zero difference, but it isn’t them who have prevented change on the scale that would be necessary to make a real, substantial difference…it’s reality that is doing that. > [@](#): > > And more recently it is thanks to denier efforts that republicans in congress are even attempting to gut the EPA, Republican congress critters are very active nowadays in attempting to do nothing. Yeah…and who is voting for them? And why? And how are they getting traction? Again, I’m not saying that they are having no effect, or that what they are doing is good or right…just that they aren’t the real problem, and if they disappeared tomorrow we STILL wouldn’t be able to address something like CO2 on a scale that would make a large difference any time soon. Even if the US followed the Kyoto Protocols to the letter it wouldn’t make a large difference in the near future, because even if the US and Europe did this you’d have to get everyone else on board too…and even then I have my doubts the run away freight train is going to be shifted on the scale of years or even decades…more like centuries. So, trying to blame deniers for this problem, as the OP is doing, is, to me, silly. Now, if you want to Pit them for being idiots and fuck heads…well, that’s a different story, and I might could get on board with dat. -XT ---
**Author:** ![spazurek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@spazurek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazurek)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/43 "2012-06-27T21:48:46Z")
> [@EmAnJ](#): > > But still, I am not convinced this is the fault of AGW deniers! I wouldn’t argue that the current fires are the fault of contemporary AGW deniers; it’s more like anti-science-ism (pardon the clumsy neologism) of all stripes, past and present. AGW-denialism just represents the current strain (and a very virulent one). My main point is that AGW-denialism will continue us down this road of environmental devastation. I blame anti-science-ism rather than anti-environmentalism because plenty of environmentalism is anti-scientific and equally destructive. But well-intentioned foolishness gets more of a pass because at least woolly-headed environmentalists have the right ultimate aim and might, possibly, be persuaded by evidence. AGW denialists genuinely don’t care about the future of the environment. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/44 "2012-06-27T21:52:49Z")
> [@EmAnJ](#): > > But still, I am not convinced this is the fault of AGW deniers! James Hansen did warn us about it since the 80’s (including the increase in forest fires) the reality is that right now it is thanks to the efforts from outfits like the Heartland institute that politicians today are influenced to do nothing, specially the Republicans. > **[Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M Conway | Book review](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2010/aug/08/merchants-of-doubt-oreskes-conway)** > > This exposé of the coterie of rightwing scientists hell-bent on destroying the cause of environmentalism is outstanding, says Robin McKie > [@](#): > > So why this hysterical vilification? Why these sudden denunciations of Carson? The answer – provided by Oreskes and Conway in this painstakingly assembled but nevertheless riveting piece of investigative reporting – is simple. The far right in America, in its quest to ensure the perpetuation of the free market, is now hell-bent on destroying the cause of environmentalism. > > According to this distorted view of life, environmentalists are watermelons – green on the outside, red on the inside – who want to impose regulation, “the slippery slope to socialism”, on the use of tobacco, ozone-destroying chemicals and greenhouse gases. “And in the demonising of Rachel Carson, free marketeers realised that if you could convince people that an example of successful government regulation wasn’t, in fact, successful – that it was actually a mistake – you could strengthen the argument against regulation in general,” state Oreskes and Conway. > > Hence the monstering of Carson’s reputation, an act of deliberate misinformation, say Oreskes and Conway, that has become the hallmark of a group of far-right institutions that are funded by businesses and conservative foundations and supported by a coterie of rightwing scientists who believe ecological threats are made up by lefty researchers as part of a grand plan to expand government control over our lives. These are the villains of Merchants of Doubt, and the same names pop up throughout its pages: scientists such as Fred Seitz, Robert Jastrow and Bill Nierenberg, along with the institutes through which they, and their kind, have lent their services to a range of rightwing, free-market foundations and institutions including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the source of that anti-Carson diatribe that I quoted earlier. When not funded by the tobacco industry, many of these outfits often receive backing from fossil-fuel companies such as Exxon. > > In these campaigns, a common strategy is evident: discredit the science, spread confusion and promote doubt, tactics that were introduced in the 70s to combat plans to limit smoking – whose links to cancer were by then becoming unambiguous – and which have been refined and used in battles to combat acid rain, ozone-layer depletion and greenhouse gas emissions. > > Real science is dismissed as “junk” while misrepresentations are offered in its place. Thus cancer is triggered by many different causes, not just smoke, it was argued – even though the tobacco industry was, by this time, admitting in private that there was indeed a definite link between smoking and serious disease. Similarly acid rain was blamed not on its real cause, the by-products of burning fossil fuels, but on volcanic eruptions, which were also said to be the cause of the depletion of the ozone layer. So, yea, I have seen this movie before, nowadays many do know that tobacco had to be regulated, and so it eventually it was, but not before many had died already. If we are prepared I do not think that people die for this inaction in controlling global warming gas emissions, but I’m not optimistic of even being prepared to adapt because one of the political parties in America has decided that we should not even prepare as this problem “is not happening”. ---
**Author:** ![EmAnJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d2c977/32.png) [@EmAnJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EmAnJ)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/45 "2012-06-27T21:56:25Z")
> [@spazurek](#): > > I wouldn’t argue that the current fires are the fault of contemporary AGW deniers; it’s more like anti-science-ism (pardon the clumsy neologism) of all stripes, past and present. AGW-denialism just represents the current strain (and a very virulent one). My main point is that AGW-denialism will continue us down this road of environmental devastation. > > I blame anti-science-ism rather than anti-environmentalism because plenty of environmentalism is anti-scientific and equally destructive. But well-intentioned foolishness gets more of a pass because at least woolly-headed environmentalists have the right ultimate aim and might, possibly, be persuaded by evidence. **AGW denialists genuinely don’t care about the future of the environment**. Bolding mine. I don’t know that I’d make that sweeping generalization. I am still not 100% convinced that the impact of anthropogenic GHG’s is making a significant impact on climate change, but I deeply care about our environment. I think the drivers to continuing environmental destruction lie within policy issues - a lack of scientific understanding combined with poor policy is preventing positive change, not the deniers of AGW. ---
**Author:** ![spazurek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@spazurek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazurek)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/46 "2012-06-27T21:57:49Z")
> [@XT](#): > > …trying to blame deniers for this problem, as the OP is doing, is, to me, silly. Now, if you want to Pit them for being idiots and fuck heads…well, that’s a different story, and I might could get on board with dat. Ideas drive history. The advocates of AGW denialism, and their anti-scientific forebearers, change minds. If Western society had decided decades ago to declare environmental degradation a top priority, technological innovations and social changes might have developed that could, possibly, have mitigated our current problems. More to the point, AGW deniers are unquestionably making the future worse than it would be otherwise. I believe, based on my understanding of climate and energy science and of history, that our society and our scientists are capable of altering the trends of CO2 emissions and environmental degradation. But this will only be possible if most people buy in. AGW denialism is a powerful force working against this development. Hence the pitting. ---
**Author:** ![spazurek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@spazurek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazurek)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/47 "2012-06-27T22:02:34Z")
> [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > California burns from time to time as well and it’s not a giant scab. So I have some hope things will recover. Dude, I sure hope you’re right, but I am [scared.](http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/earth-tipping-point/) ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/48 "2012-06-27T22:10:51Z")
[QUOTE=spazurek] Ideas drive history. The advocates of AGW denialism, and their anti-scientific forebearers, change minds. If Western society had decided decades ago to declare environmental degradation a top priority, technological innovations and social changes might have developed that could, possibly, have mitigated our current problems. More to the point, AGW deniers are unquestionably making the future worse than it would be otherwise. [/QUOTE] You have to see a real threat and understand it, and be able to project into the future in a cost to benefits ratio in order to get a society like the US on board. Again, pretend that there are and never were AGW deniers. Everyone believes that global climate change is happening and humans are causing it. How would things be different today? Would the average American be on board with a huge and costly lifestyle change in his or her life? Would they be willing to simultaneously increase their taxes and recurring costs for things like energy by a large enough amount to make real change? Would they be willing to change out our current use of personal transport, abandon the suburbs, or replace the current fleet of literally hundreds of millions of automobiles for (even today) vehicles that are both more expensive and have lesser performance capabilities? I’d say anyone answering this as ‘of course we would’ or something along those lines is dreaming. I look at many of the environmentalists, even on this board, who are fully agreeing that AGW is real, happening and CO2 is the major issue who refuse to even talk about nuclear energy. Could you see Americans willing to pony up literally hundreds of billions to start rapidly replacing coal fired plants with clear nuclear energy? I can’t see that…I can’t see that even TODAY, when we know a lot more about AGW and there are more people than ever on board with the concept. Even TODAY people don’t see the threat…and if they don’t see the threat they aren’t going to be willing to make the huge sacrifices necessary to combat it in any meaningful way. That’s not because of deniers, that’s because of reality and human behavior. > [@](#): > > I believe, based on my understanding of climate and energy science and of history, that our society and our scientists are capable of altering the trends of CO2 emissions and environmental degradation. But this will only be possible if most people buy in. AGW denialism is a powerful force working against this development. Hence the pitting. I don’t believe that, not in the short term. I believe that, in the long term, we’re already headed in that direction, and that we’ll get there eventually. In the US and Europe, our machines have gotten vastly cleaner in the last 2 decades, and that trend is going to continue IMHO. But it’s not going to accelerate without a public willing to commit to large sacrifices…and I don’t see that as happening. Even in countries where they don’t have a large and vocal AGW denial crowd. That’s because while I agree the AGW deniers have an effect, I think the larger effect is due to simple economics and the fact that the general public doesn’t see the threat, and thus isn’t willing to make great sacrifices for something they don’t think they need to make great sacrifices for. -XT ---
**Author:** ![spazurek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@spazurek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazurek)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/49 "2012-06-27T22:11:23Z")
> [@EmAnJ](#): > > Bolding mine. I don’t know that I’d make that sweeping generalization. I am still not 100% convinced that the impact of anthropogenic GHG’s is making a significant impact on climate change, but I deeply care about our environment. You are not the problem. Reasonable people (you) may disagree about the severity of impact that humans are having on the environment. But with your above statement, you would **never** succeed in gaining elected office in the Republican party. Reasonable people are not welcome on the conservative side of the political environment. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/50 "2012-06-27T22:15:23Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Never said otherwise, but, again, what would be different? Would we be building nuclear power plants like crazy if there were no deniers? Yes, but you are talking here about deniers of the actual rates of the danger of nuclear there, something that even I do not agree with the radical environmentalists. > [@XT](#): > > Would we be building solar and wind plants like crazy as well? Would we be replacing a large portion of our automobiles with CO2 free vehicles? When would all this be happening…and how would we be affording it? I have no doubt that denier types have made a non-zero difference, but it isn’t them who have prevented change on the scale that would be necessary to make a real, substantial difference…it’s reality that is doing that. Most of what you mention here would be financed with an emissions tax, something that a former darling of the deniers like Lonborg is even proposing now. > [@XT](#): > > Yeah…and who is voting for them? And why? And how are they getting traction? With energy companies financing the denial machine and now financing political campaigns this is getting into naive territory. There is a lot of of pressure for powerful interests to pretend change, just check “The Merchants Of Doubt” by Oreskes. > [@XT](#): > > Again, I’m not saying that they are having no effect, or that what they are doing is good or right…just that they aren’t the real problem, and if they disappeared tomorrow we STILL wouldn’t be able to address something like CO2 on a scale that would make a large difference any time soon. Even if the US followed the Kyoto Protocols to the letter it wouldn’t make a large difference in the near future, because even if the US and Europe did this you’d have to get everyone else on board too…and even then I have my doubts the run away freight train is going to be shifted on the scale of years or even decades…more like centuries. So, trying to blame deniers for this problem, as the OP is doing, is, to me, silly. Now, if you want to Pit them for being idiots and fuck heads…well, that’s a different story, and I might could get on board with dat. > > -XT One of the biggest items IMHO that is ignored in arguments like that one is that once you have a big markets on board, then others that try to ignore it actually change suddenly as they feel a lot of pressure to produce things like better solar panels and wind engines. As Europe does not have to deal much with a denier industry, they are making a lot of progress in deploying alternative technologies, and then places like China produce more of the stuff. The results are something of an open secret: in the case of solar panels they are becoming so cheap that very soon if not already the cost of generating electricity from the sun is matching the cost of coal-fueled plants. [http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/04/06/207832/april-6-news-solar-costs-may-already-rival-coal-the-surprisingly-long-history-of-green-energy/](http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/04/06/207832/april-6-news-solar-costs-may-already-rival-coal-the-surprisingly-long-history-of-green-energy/) ---
**Author:** ![spazurek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@spazurek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazurek)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/51 "2012-06-27T22:25:11Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Pretend that there are and never were AGW deniers. Everyone believes that global climate change is happening and humans are causing it. How would things be different today? Would the average American be on board with a huge and costly lifestyle change in his or her life? Would they be willing to simultaneously increase their taxes and recurring costs for things like energy by a large enough amount to make real change? Would they be willing to change out our current use of personal transport, abandon the suburbs, or replace the current fleet of literally hundreds of millions of automobiles for (even today) vehicles that are both more expensive and have lesser performance capabilities? I’d say anyone answering this as ‘of course we would’ or something along those lines is dreaming. I guess I have enough faith in the optimism of humanity, and of Americans especially, to say that we could have made a difference. Many of our most deeply-held beliefs evolved and matured in startlingly little time – views on women, blacks, gays. All of these were wars of ideas and ideology, and success came when good ideas superceded bad ones. They all involved practical sacrifices, but truth won nevertheless. I think the same could happen with global warming/envonmentalism. The only obstacle is bad ideas. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/52 "2012-06-27T22:34:34Z")
> [@spazurek](#): > > The only obstacle is bad ideas. I agree, but it has to be remarked that what we have here are bad ideas with heavily financed [del]stink[/del] think tanks. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/53 "2012-06-27T22:54:00Z")
> [@spazurek](#): > > Dude, I sure hope you’re right, but I am [scared.](http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/earth-tipping-point/) I hear ya. The only thing I hate worse than moving is big old bitey desert arachnids like tarantulas & scorpions. I’ll get my ass right back to Seattle if it starts looking like NM or AZ around here. At least there I’ll have a canoe so I can escape when the ice caps melt, or will die pretty quickly when the Cascades pop. ---
**Author:** ![spazurek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@spazurek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazurek)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/54 "2012-06-27T23:03:37Z")
> [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > I hear ya. The only thing I hate worse than moving is big old bitey desert arachnids like tarantulas & scorpions. I’ll get my ass right back to Seattle if it starts looking like NM or AZ around here. At least there I’ll have a canoe so I can escape when the ice caps melt, or will die pretty quickly when the Cascades pop. Woah, I was in Seattle before here too! Seattle might actually be quite awesome when global warming kicks in. Well, the higher ground anyway. Recent housing crash + warming climate = profit? Though as you point out, volcanoes. Does global warming make eruption more likely? Wouldn’t surprise me. ---
**Author:** ![spazurek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b2d939/32.png) [@spazurek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazurek)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/55 "2012-06-27T23:08:56Z")
On the other hand, maybe changes to prevailing winds would blow all the ash East. Watching Ranier explode from the top of the Space Needle might just be worth devastation of half the world’s population. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/56 "2012-06-27T23:14:10Z")
Had to dig into the sands of time to find a Facebook post I made last August: “Funny how nobody makes any jokes about global warming as Dallas starts its 34th straight day of over-100 degree weather.” ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/57 "2012-06-27T23:15:28Z")
> [@spazurek](#): > > Does global warming make eruption more likely? Wouldn’t surprise me. Might or might not surprise me, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it made earthquakes more likely, as changing temperature expands the rock in a way that it hasn’t experienced in millennia. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/58 "2012-06-27T23:20:55Z")
> [@spazurek](#): > > In case anyone cares, [here’s some pertinent scientific evidence.](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fires-fuel-climate-change) Hm. According to _Scientific American,_ it’s a vicious cycle – climate change leads to more forest fires, and the fires add more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, and so on. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/59 "2012-06-27T23:23:00Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Skeptics (and most of them are not skeptics, many do deny the climate science) . . . 😕 What’s the difference? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462/60 "2012-06-27T23:36:34Z")
[This bit](Various claims by global warming denialists) from RationalWiki on “Various claims by global warming denialists” is informative. Or if that’s too dry for you, let’s play ["Global Warming Denial Bingo](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fun:Global_Warming_Denial_Bingo)! 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thanks-agw-deniers-we-were-getting-tired-of-all-those-trees/626462.md?page=4)