Bush finally warms to warming (You've got to be kidding)

MSNBC.com ^ | 12-29-07

[DeaconRed]

Please call it what it really is.

"GLOBAL WORMING

People trying to "Worm" $$ from US.

[yield 2 the right]

Well it looks like my votes for Bush in 2000 and in 2004 were all for not.....

[GladesGuru]

“We lost W on immigration;”

Really? I was unaware he was ever in favor of controlling immigration or closing the southern OR northern borders.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Don’t believe everything you read from PMSNBC.

[From many - one.]

Just in case you really couldn’t figure out the obvious:

The source of the problem should not prevent attempts to alleviate the negative effects.

There are two anti-global warming responses I read:
1. It’s not really happening so there’s nothing to do.

2. It’s a natural phenomenon so there’s nothing to do.

#1 I’m not qualified to evaluate. I took meterology and climatology half a century ago.

#2 is what I’m commenting on.

[SuziQ]

The only brainwashing going on is when we take the word of MSNBC as law.

Ain't THAT the truth! I usually believe just the opposite when PMS-NBC starts trying to tell me how Bush has 'evolved' or 'grown' on some issue.

[devolve]

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

DOOMAGE!

Global Warming PING!

You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.

Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.

Global Warming on FreeRepublic

Latest from Global Warming News Site

Latest from Greenie Watch

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

I’d like to dump this entire government, all government agencies, all amendments to the constitution, and reinstate a representative republic. Who’s with me?

Fine with me, as long as you jettison that 3/5-person nonsense for representing blacks.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

“Too many years in Washington corrupts the senses.”

Yep. Anything beyond two years pretty much does it.

Term. Limits. Now! :)

[socialismisinsidious]

Or maybe one wakes up to the glorious opportunity of being able to pick pocket and control the American people and have to show absolutely nothing for it: do nothing, prove nothing, change nothing. It’s a win-win no matter what the climate does; perfect con game. Not much different than what Washington does now, just a different avenue.

[socialismisinsidious]

And people in the midwest are "seeing" things differently...record snow falls.

All that I care about is trying to figger out the best actions to take and over what timeline.

Why? What makes you think you can do anything and what makes you think warming (if it is happening) is a bad thing? Gee whiz would you have tried to stop the glaciers from melting 10,000 years ago during the ice age or maybe you would believe that man could have stopped Pangea from breaking apart and forming the continents? The earth is changing someone stop it! with no thought that maybe it's suppose to and maybe there is nothing that can be done about it. The earth has been changing since the day it was made....only conceit would think something, (anything make it stop!) can be done about it.

Do I have to even mention that the "experts" can't predict the weather for next week let alone next year?!

[socialismisinsidious]

Evidence of the eyes.

People use to believe that maggots spontaneously generate from meat. They could see the maggots crawling out of the rotten meat and that made it a scientific fact.

[From many - one.]

No, the science came when a scientist (Francesco Redi) protected the meat inside clear glass jars, some of which he sealed and some of which he didn’t.

[socialismisinsidious]

Exactly and the point is: he proved that what people saw was not what the truth was. Seeing is not science. History is full of people concluding a cause/effect that isn’t.

[From many - one.]

The best action to take might well be to enjoy it while it lasts.

You haven’t seen me take a position on the reality of GW, just on a potential response pattern. I have specifically stated that taking meterology and climatology half a century ago does not qualify me to accurately evaluate the reports.

But, simply as a matter of adult responibility, I am prepared for quite a number of things that may never happen. A bit of cost benefit analysis helps decide.

[From many - one.]

Track back to my original post on this thread to see what my point was. You are simply substantiating it, not contraverting it.

[socialismisinsidious]

A bit of cost benefit analysis helps decide.

Makes perfect sense usually but in this case we are talking about something that 1.hasn't been proved either way and 2. has become so politicized that it has become nothing but a means to usurp power and money. That alone makes the cost too high.

[socialismisinsidious]

Evidence of the eyes. I was in DC last week and there are garden flowers blooming.

The point that I was trying to make: Seeing flowers blooming in DC does not prove global warming, just as seeing maggots crawl out of meat does not prove spontaneous generation.

[Darkwolf377]

MSNBC reports nothing with no reason. This article strikes me as taking a few things Bush has put out there to appease the boobs and then decided "OK, pal, we'll show YOU" and spun it to seem like he was turning Green. They would love to be able to say "Look at all the good publicity you got from that article, why not try more?"

The above is a total invention, but it sure isn't beyond believability.