| | | |
Holo Lukaloa
|
12/10/2009 7:57:50 PM
Sarah Palin weasels out of possible climate change debate with Al Gore
INGRAHAM: Would you agree to a debate with Al Gore on this issue?
PALIN: Oh my goodness. You know, it depends on what the venue would be, what the forum. Because Laura, as you know, if it would be some kind of conventional, traditional debate with his friends setting it up or being the commentators I'll get clobbered because, you know, they don't want to listen to the facts. They don't want to listen to some reasonable voices in this. And that was proven with the publication of this op-ed, where they kind of got all we-weed up about it and wanted to call me and others deniers of changing weather patterns and climate conditions. Trying to make the issue into something that it is not.
INGRAHAM: But what if it's an Oxford-style, proper debate format. I mean, he's going to chicken out. I mean, if you challenge him to a debate, do you actually think he would accept it?
PALIN: I don't know, I don't know. Oh, he wouldn't want to lower himself, I think, to, you know, my level to debate little old Sarah Palin from Wasilla.
|
|
Conversation Suicide
|
12/10/2009 11:57:27 PM
All I know, is it dipped below 8 degrees Farenheit in Leicester, Leicestershire area England the other day. brrrrrrr.....
That's gonna be a minor challenge!
|
|
Holo Lukaloa
|
12/11/2009 1:44:58 AM
You do know the polar ice cap is melting, don't you? Do you think cow farts or volcanoes caused that?
|
|
Stevers
|
12/11/2009 4:18:28 PM
Give it a rest already, ya nimrod.
|
|
Diane Hulfnagel
|
12/11/2009 7:06:34 PM
Which one? :)
|
|
HunkaFunk
|
12/11/2009 10:45:34 PM
Sarah Palin couldn't debate her way out of a paper bag. She is a character actor, that's all. A pit bull with lipstick, nice legs, short attention span. Just because someone doesn't buy this new rhetoric about debunking man made global warming, it doesn't make him a "Tool", or a Nimrod (who by the way was a mighty hunter of men, and quite an evil cat!).
We all gotta get together on something, or we all lose to the power hungry corporate greed mongers, and the few, the mighty, the wealthy.
|
|
Kevin White
|
12/11/2009 10:54:12 PM
The polar ice caps are re-forming ... and getting thicker again.
Science is just guessing and doesn't know whether man has anything to do with the warming or not.
Specifically and scientifically, they can't find direct correlation.
They don't know. They just don't know.
They have ONE answer that they've found DOES correlate: Sunspot activity.
That's it.
|
|
HunkaFunk
|
12/11/2009 11:02:35 PM
Yeah, who really knows anyway. It's all theories, speculation. Besides, even if man made climate change were the gospel truth, China is never going to toe the line, and the third world can't afford the reform. Besides, the world will probably end with an asteroid hit, or gigantic solar flare.
Shit, who reallys knows anything for sure...but we gotta keep asking the questions...don't we?
|
|
Pulse Eternal
|
12/12/2009 8:40:56 AM
Good post Kev. I agree with you here :-)
|
|
Holo Lukaloa
|
12/12/2009 9:24:20 AM
Kevin is this another thing you're an expert about? What are your credentials? :>)
|
|
jingo
|
12/12/2009 10:58:35 AM
Holo loves him some Sarah!
What caused / ended previous ice ages? Evil humans in time machines, fleeing to the past to escape carbon trading? That must be it. Time travel must be stopped - somedody call Al Gore, quickly.
Debate THAT, if you can.
|
|
Kevin White
|
12/12/2009 12:13:10 PM
Just the facts, is all, Holo.
But I will offer this - Before we embark on a HUGELY EXPENSIVE cap and trade policy that no one is really certain:
a) Will work or not
b) Is necessary at all
c) Compliance is not enforceable
I'd like more than "scientific fad of the moment" and would appreciate a better correlation between our carbon imprint and the earth's temperature.
"This is our best guess" and "It might be this" w/o a stitch of corroborating evidence is nothing to jump into such far reaching action over.
Should we reduce our carbon footprint? Absolutely! I drive a Prius. It's 25 degrees here in chilly New England and my home is being heated geo-thermally by Mother Earth (w/o burning fossil fuel). I encourage 100% renewal green energy research ... harnessing the energy inherent in wind, lightning, tide and sun to power our small scale need.
But I want that because I want mankind to breath clean air, and have a natural footprint on the planet, and continue to have the resource we critical need not depleted or squandered recklessly; not because I think global warming has totally fucked us.
That's just chicken little talk.
For example: If we blow it all on cars and home heating oil, then planes can't fly. So we MUST harbor it for our primary, not secondary purposes. If there are other ways to preserve what we have, let's do that. If we run out of oil, major shit hits.
It's arrogantly human to think we matter so much on this rock. I'm not willing to premise dramatic change on "lock step" science.
|
|
Cantrip
|
12/12/2009 12:33:31 PM
fact - folks get cancer living downwind from toxic expelling facilities.
fact - WE (humans) can't destroy the planet. WE (humans) can reduce the available regions for human survival by our own doing. Look at China and the growing sand storms and desert area uninhabitable as a result of over grazing. ...nothing to do with fossil fuels. The clear cutting of rainforest, mining,.. on and on. BFD,.. it is the HUMAN element of survival at stake here, not the planet's.
we will fuck ourselves out of our own ability to survive. the earth will be fine
the damage done b the burning of fossil fuel may be weighing heavy on climate change, or it may not. either way, if any of you think the earth won't be spinning around the sun after we are gone are idiots. Life may or may not adapt, but, I think the human race deserves what it gets. The 'bad' people who put us here are no worse than the innocent bystanders doing nothing. so fuck all ya'll :)
|
|
Chris Hance
|
12/12/2009 12:47:35 PM
Thankyou Can, best point of the thread so far :)
|
|
HunkaFunk
|
12/12/2009 3:24:10 PM
I think Kevin has a good point.
I'm sure none of us here on IAC are experts in anything having to do with climate, and man's impact, or lack of it (apologies to those meteorologist IACers). It's seems fun to argue about it though, and of course tell each other to fuck off, and call each other names. There are things though, that I know for sure.
I lived in Los angeles in 1968-1970. The smog was choking, and it burned my eyes. You could taste it in the air, and couldn't see the city from Griffith Park, just a thick yellow blanket with tall buildings poking out.
Since then, the E.P.A. has enforced catalytic converters, and other controls on car emissions, as well as removed lead from gasoline across the board. And even though the smog in L.A. today still sucks, and creeps in all directions during the summer months...I know for a FACT it is better than it was.
I think we can all do our part (within the boundaries of economics, etc.), to at least alleviate some of the manmade impact on our precious gift, The Earth. Recycling, walking (instead of driving) when we can, not littering, and boycotting companies known to have little, or no regard for our lives, and The Earth. And of course, staying informed, and avoiding jumping on bandwagons without any real knowledge of issues. Really just taking any opportunity to be part of the solution, not the problem...when we can.
As far as us destroying Earth (or it being destroyed by anything else)... I believe what The bible says at: Ecclesiastes 1:4 "One generation passeth away,and another generation cometh; but the earth abideth forever" Yes, I believe in God (and The Bible), so think me a fool...I don't care.
TF
|
|
| |
�2015-16 IndieMusicPeople.com All Rights
Reserved
| |