Letters to the Editor
Renegade Iconoclast
Published Letters: 660 Editor's Choice: 11
-
No one is saying the sky is falling tomorrow
[Read the article: The year in the environment]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We're saying it may.
I'll make this prediction: 50 years from now, when the 4th world water war (WWW4) is being fought, no one will be laughing about Gore getting the Nobel peace prize.
I'll make this suggestion: let's take the money and oil we're expending on Iraq, and build nuclear power plants across the globe, starting with the United states, and continuing to the rest of the world, in order of how much they pollute. Let's make all cars electrical.
Sure, we may have some meltdowns. It's better than 90% of the world's population dying off.
The fact is, we have to take drastic measures. Any drastic measure we take, other than nuclear power, is definitely going to kill millions of people. Let's all dismantle our warheads and use them to fire up the power plants. Swords into plowshares, people.
Wouldn't it be ironic if the age of Aquarius ends up being peaceful... because no humans are left to fight with each other?
-
Who's full of hot air?
[Read the article: The year in the environment]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Well, Mr. Figg, you really know how to dig yourself in deep, don't you?
They ignored real science when they handed out this year’s Peace Prize by kowtowing to tobacco Al. Climate-change-bureaucrats dictating in Indonesia that there is an unequivocal scientific consensus on the cause of climate change: i.e. humanity, is a blatant lie
Really? Care to back that up with a shred of evidence or, I don't know, maybe a peer-reviewed scientific paper? Or are you just shouting "liar, liar, pants on fire?" That wouldn't be a bunch of hot air from your gasbag, would it?
and is a dangerous example of trying to, for personal political and financial gain, undercut the scientific method and stifle the debate of experimental results, similar to what the Nazis did for several years in Germany.
Oh, yeah, we all have so much to gain by continuing our current course of burning everything in sight. And everyone knows the Nazis set fuel emissions standards, so we shouldn't do it. Danger! If we stop burning coal.... ehrm.... danger!
Only a scientific idiot can be “against global warming”, as only a scientific idiot is unaware that the earth has been warming since the last ice age.
Only an idiot would repeat this fact, and ignore the fact that we have accelerated it. Only an idiot would fail to realize that, just because something is a cycle, it doesn't mean the cycle can't be imbalanced by external forces. Only an idiot would disagree with the well established scientific fact that CO2 has never been above 300 ppm in geological history, and today is at 380 ppm.
The global warming crisis is the biggest scam since the Y2K computer scam, and you only have to follow the money trail to see who’s benefiting from all this. All of the “save the world” jet setters in Indonesia stand to make a buck off this snake oil
Ya, the "Indonesian jet-setters" have WAY more to gain than, say, the oil lobby and the car makers. Wow. I couldn't make this crap up if I tried.
Global warming alarmism attracts cynical scientific researchers concerned primarily with personal research funding, clever politicians who stand to personally benefit from global warming taxes and credits
Nice try. Every single scientific study reveals the same answer. Even the studies that George Bush himself commissioned revealed the same answer. Global warming caused by industry is a huge problem, and is accelerating.
Why am I not surprised that you didn't quote a single scientific source to back up your claim? Here, I'll answer that one: because you don't have any.
-
Strawmen and liars, and lies, oh my
[Read the article: The year in the environment]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sayeth Figg Leaf:
Just last week 400 scientists published their concerns about Al Gore and his disciples
Actually, no, that's a flat out lie. What happened was that global warming denier James Inhofe (R. Oklahoma) used taxpayer money for a "study," that cherry picked a lot of "scientists'" quotes about global warming out of context. The supposed scientists included a whole lot of economists, physicists, philosophy of science "scientists," geomagnetism experts, etc, but not a lot of actual, you know, climate scientists.
You're not responding to anything I said, just building up strawmen to tear down, and bringing up irrelevancies. No one said that the third world should have to build solar panels overnight. What we're saying is that energy reform should be our top priority. We're saying that the cost of inaction is higher than the cost of action.
I would furthermore argue that we in the U.S. can become a world leader again, and inspire confidence, trust, and even respect around the world by leading the world on this issue. Even furthermore, we can make a profit at the same time. There's a lot of money to be made in alternative energy, but it will take a massive, concerted, nationwide effort, the likes of which have not been seen since FDR.
Or we could just play ostrich and stick our heads in the sand.