L
Lapey
Guest
There ya go bait and switch. Bait us with untruth in order to attempt to switch the focus. You’re so predictable.
- Status
L
Lapey
Guest
This is part of the frustration, only one side is heard in the media. Sad…
Obama has done more harm to more people and nobody in the media reports on it.
Why are so many on food stamps, why has their need skyrocketed in this admins rein?
If these were truly cuts I would be fighting with the leftist media, but hey are not cutting and starving children.
Same old tactics, nothing changes.
M
Michael_Mayo
Guest
And “fewer people than EVER” is sill 72% according to your article.
While 19% disbelieve.
“The Government funded report shows 19 per cent of people are climate change disbelievers - up from just four per cent in 2005 - while nine per cent did not know.”
"Of course, however, the 72 per cent of the public who acknowledge the climate is changing are backed overwhelmingly by the scientific evidence.
According to your artilce it may be due to governmental** inaction**.
"Natalie Bennett blamed the Government for the increase in climate change doubters.
She said: “When the government is so clearly failing to act on climate change, or take seriously its obligations under the Climate Change Act, it’s not surprising that the level of doubt about climate change has risen.”
T
TerryOfromCA
Guest
I would be comfortable guesstimating that 72% of people are morons.
However, I think the real issue isn’t whether or not its warming, but rather whether or not any changes are because of man. Because if they are NOT of man then all then green technology is a waste of time and money. A better argument would be to ask how long oil reserves will last. At least we can all agree that they are finite. But this global warming gang are too kooky for me.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
That’s in Britain. In the U.S. Fewer than 50% believe MMGW is a major threat. Even in Canada, only 54% do.
Naltalie Bennett can blame the government all she wants, but the failure of MMGW projections to come true probably has more to do with it.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Looks like Americans’ belief in it is falling. climatedepot.com/2013/09/05/rasmussen-reports-poll-most-people-dont-blame-humans-for-global-warming/
That it’s falling from a much higher belief base in britain than here still means it’s falling both here and there.
Interesting how recognition of the “global warming pause” seems to be changing among some scientists to predictions of global cooling. climatedepot.com/2013/06/15/forget-the-temperature-plateau-earth-undergoing-global-cooling-since-2002-climate-scientist-dr-judith-curry-attention-in-the-public-debate-seems-to-be-moving-away-from/
I hope they’re wrong.
That it’s falling from a much higher belief base in britain than here still means it’s falling both here and there.
Interesting how recognition of the “global warming pause” seems to be changing among some scientists to predictions of global cooling. climatedepot.com/2013/06/15/forget-the-temperature-plateau-earth-undergoing-global-cooling-since-2002-climate-scientist-dr-judith-curry-attention-in-the-public-debate-seems-to-be-moving-away-from/
I hope they’re wrong.
B
BigBlueCane
Guest
Yes they are cuts because people need them. If you don’t think cutting 40 billion dollars will be a significant blow to the SNAP program then you have something else coming.This is part of the frustration, only one side is heard in the media. Sad…
Obama has done more harm to more people and nobody in the media reports on it.
Why are so many on food stamps, why has their need skyrocketed in this admins rein?
If these were truly cuts I would be fighting with the leftist media, but hey are not cutting and starving children.
Same old tactics, nothing changes.
Thankfully we have a democratically controlled senate and president who won’t permit that.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
There are no “cuts”. There is only the expectation that enforcing the “available for work” requirement for able bodied adults with no dependents will result in less of an increase in spending than not enforcing it.
Let’s focus on the reality here. Is there some compelling reason why an able-bodied person with no dependents should not make himself/herself available for a job, even if it’s community service, alternatively to take job training?
If so, what is that reason?
L
Lapey
Guest
Democrat talking points, nicely done sir…
M
Michael_Mayo
Guest
ClimateDepot.com is the website of Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow employee Marc Morano, a conservative global warming denier who previously served as environmental communications director for a vocal political denier of climate change, Republican Sen. James Inhofe.
sourcewatch.org/index.php/Climate_Depot
sourcewatch.org/index.php/Climate_Depot
D
DoGodsBidding
Guest
M
Michael_Mayo
Guest
M
Michael_Mayo
Guest
The Plan begins by stating:
While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, we have a moral obligation to future generations to leave them a planet that is not polluted and damaged.
Do we “have a moral obligation to future generations to leave them a planet that is not polluted and damaged” or at least not more polluted and damageed than it already is?
While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, we have a moral obligation to future generations to leave them a planet that is not polluted and damaged.
Do we “have a moral obligation to future generations to leave them a planet that is not polluted and damaged” or at least not more polluted and damageed than it already is?
J
JimG
Guest
I do think we have a moral obligation to future generations to not leave them with bankruptcy rather than an inheritance. We ought not to start them out in life with a burdensome debt which they can never repay. It would be like starting them out with huge education debts without giving them an education.
I also think we have a moral obligation not to confer upon them a society in a state of moral chaos and moral bankruptcy. But seem intent on conferring on them both moral and economic bankruptcy.
I also think we have a moral obligation not to confer upon them a society in a state of moral chaos and moral bankruptcy. But seem intent on conferring on them both moral and economic bankruptcy.
E
estesbob
Guest
L
Lapey
Guest
What is the largest acute threat to future generations;
MMGW
National Debt
shrinking middle class
rising poverty
moral depravity
loss of religious freedom
I could go on. Please give me your biggest moral concern of these or one you can site from your own thoughts.
L
lynnvinc
Guest
Quite right. AGW is creating bankruptcy – such as for people losing their homes to AGW enhanced floods, droughts, fires, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.
My sister’s town of Lyons, CO was practically wiped off the map recently. And this is only a tiny foretaste of the extreme and widespread damages and bankruptcy that will be plaguing future generations once AGW really sets in.
E
estesbob
Guest
Nonsense.I live in Estes Park. We and Lyons had a similar food in 1973 sand 1936 I deeply recsent you trying to score cheap political points off our tragedy. We had our first dusting of snow this year after the floods.Global warming my ***
M
Michael_Mayo
Guest
Thank you for a clear and honest answer.
L
lynnvinc
Guest
Did you have all the same contamination & oil spill issues back then?
My sister didn’t fair badly – her home is in an unincorporated area far from the rivers and she has her own well water, so she thinks it’s okay and plans to move back soon. Her main loss was living in hotels and traveling (which she could not afford) because the road was washed away and she couldn’t get back home. However, some of her friends’ homes were washed away. It’s not good to make light of others’ tragedies, as if they are just normal. And we, for our part, should be doing all we can to reduce our GHGs so as to reduce our contributions to even more extreme events in the future.
One needs to understand that global warming increases the probability of more intense and frequent “natural” disasters. Warmer atmosphere holds more water vapor (which is also a GHG), and under certain weather conditions this could spell severe drought and dessication of flora, leading to greater wildfire potential. Under other conditions it can lead to extreme deluges.
I do understand that people who have suffered extreme weather events are actually less likely to accept AGW science. I did a survey and found that flood victims, for instance, were less like to accept the reality of AGW, controlling for education, gender, etc. It’s counter-intuitive, I know, but I figured it is because they cannot face the idea that the once in 100 years or 500 years disasters may be coming much more frequently. Perhaps they cannot face the idea of what horrible harms they may be foisting on their children and grandchildren.
You may resent me – I can take your scorn for the sake of the kingdom of God – but the future generations are surely going to be spitting on our graves. However, depending on where they are located, they might be spitting in the ocean.
- Status