http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=be4b2831-e1c a-4d91-a8d0-426ce36fe059

It's called climate change, which means some areas are colder than normal and some areas are warmer.

It is the neocon idiots who stick to the "global warming" term mistake to confuse the issue.

Actually, its about climate change, caused by man, and does it really happen.

The leftist liberals, keep insisting its manmade, when there is exactly no evidence to support that.

So let's just continue to use smog making coal fired plants and build cars that get 8 MPG! There is NO problem here!!!!

Nothing wrong with coal fired plants, If President Clinton hadn't labeled thousands of acres in Utah as a protected area, our fuel imports would be drastically lower.

Nothing wrong with an 8 MPG car, if you can afford the gas.

I am in the middle camp that believe much of the change is actually natural, but is being made worse by us. Air pollution is not natural, but man-made.

I also believe that much is natural too. But BETTER fuel economy on ALL cars driven in the United States is a good start and scrubbers on ALL coal fired plants is necessary!

There are reasons to have better fuel economy, and cleaner coal fired plants, although new coal plants, using low sulpher coal are pretty clean anyway.

Global warming isn't one of them.

I have said all along, we should increase the fed gas tax by at least a dollar a gallon, with the funds being split evenly between energy research and social security.

Thank God for 40 mpg Toyota Corolla's!

The left says no to nuclear power.
The left says no to liquified natural gas.
The left says no to coal.
The left says no to cutting trees.
The left says no to Alaskan Oil.

And then the left complains about our reliance on foreign energy.

Herb

"And then the left complains about our reliance on foreign energy."

While you choose to destroy God's creation.

Trees are a renewable resource and our French friends are using nuclear power, big time.

We're not getting much more but hand-wringing from the left....except the violence from earth-firsters.

Herb

Herb seems to forget Three-Mile Island and Chernobyl.

I think the "global warming" is just a natural cycle that the earth has gone thru for a gazillion years.

Is mankind contributing to global warming? I doubt that we are in any amount to make any difference.

That being said, we (mankind) are definitely contributing to the pollution and that should be our main focus.

Dumping heavy metals into the rivers, overflowing sewage plants, i.e. downtown Portland and the Willamette River, (I wouldn't swim there or eat any fish from there on a bet!) and the scores of other pollutants that we dump everywhere are what need to be stopped or reduced to acceptable levels.

If they took all the money that is being wasted on the global warming farce and put it towards reducing/stopping pollution we'd all be far better off.

Three mile island, very old style reactor, and there was no major radioactive leak. Chernobol, early Soviet reactor, with no containment dome.

Comparing 50's era reactors with modern ones, is like comparing 50's automibiles safety features with todays.

Nwokie, Shrub's guys can't even inspect meat plants, so how can we expect them to inspect nuclear plants.

Since meat inspectors as are nuclear plant inspectors are all civil service employees, they run the range of Johnson through Bush, The presiedent has no input on appointments to the civil service.

While you leftists are decrying conservatives, thank your lucky stars that Mr. Nixon founded the Environmental Protection Agency.

Richard Nixon, environmentalist.

Herb

Herbie, dammit, quit revising history. NEPA was an act of Congress.
The government's own website shows how Nixon deserved little credit for the agency created when he was president.

" ... Cabinet-level Environmental Quality Council as well as a Citizens' Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality. His (Nixon's) critics charged that these were largely ceremonial bodies, with almost no real power."

"It was at just this time that Congress sent to the President a remarkable bill known as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Senator Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis)--looking back at the "Environmental Decade" in 1980--called NEPA "the most important piece of environmental legislation in our history." It is easy to see why.

A tone of high-minded idealism pervades this statute. NEPA's stated purposes were:

"To declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment."

"To promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man."

"To enrich our understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation." "

"In sending Reorganization Plan No. 3 to Congress on July 9, the President admitted that he had first been reluctant to propose setting up a new independent agency."

http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/epa/15c.htm

Your are giving thief Nixon way too much credit for something he reluctantly agreed to. The way you play it, Herb, you make it sound like he was some kind of white knight in shining armor having come to save the environment. Clearly, that is not the case.

This is tantamount to the shrub trying to lay claim to Homeland Security, something he was against but eventually relented to.

How short sighted the right wing brain is.

Now on to other statements so narrow minded I took pause.

Nwokie: "he leftist liberals, keep insisting its manmade, when there is exactly no evidence to support that."

No evidence? There is plenty of evidence that since the industrial revolution the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere has risen sharply, and tracking that rise is the earth's average temperature. There is so much proof of this, that denying it makes you look like an uneducated fool. As a technician of information science, I am astounded that you could make a statement so ignorant.

Nwokie: "Nothing wrong with coal fired plants"

The new ones are OK. But the shrub and dickhead cheney refuse to make the old coal plants come up to speed on emissions. Don't oversimplify a very complex issue.

Herbie: "The left says no to nuclear power.

Nuclear waste is the issue. Can we bury it in your backyard, Herbie?

Skybill: "I think the "global warming" is just a natural cycle that the earth has gone thru for a gazillion years. "

See the CO2 paragraph above. Natural global warming? The levels of CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere are not part of any "natural" cycle. Cut me a break.

Herbie: "The left says no ... "

No, Herbala, it's the fucki*g Republicans saying no:

December 13th, 2007
"The House passed an energy bill last week, which is a solid piece of legislation. It included the first increase in federal fuel efficiency standards in three decades, encourages the use of renewable energy sources, and rolls back $13.5 billion in tax breaks for the five largest U.S. oil companies, redirecting the money into conservation and development of renewable fuels.

Last week, Dems tried to quickly move the bill onto the White House, but came up short after a Republican filibuster over a provision that requires electric utilities to get some of its power from renewable energy. This morning, the Senate minority blocked the bill again, insisting that oil companies keep billions of dollars in tax breaks.

Republicans were able to stall a broad energy bill in the Senate on Thursday morning, prompting Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader, to excise controversial parts of the measure in hopes of moving the legislation forward quickly.

The unsuccessful move to advance the bill failed by one vote. Supporters managed to get 59 “yes” votes, but 60 were needed to invoke cloture, or move to consideration of the bill itself. Forty senators voted “no.” The only senator not voting was John McCain, Republican of Arizona, who is campaigning for president in Iowa.

Among other things, the bill would require automakers to meet a fleet average of 35 miles a gallon by 2020, up from the current 25 miles per gallon. Supporters of the legislation hail it as the first meaningful improvement in fuel-efficiency standards in three decades."

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13916.html

Go ahead. Don't believe that Global Warming is caused to any significant degree by humans. It doesn't matter. Pretty soon you'll be proven wrong. Just like you are on all the other stuff that you cling to that keeps us from moving forward. Eventually, you guys always turn around. Then you'll try and take credit for the discovery or clean up or whatever makes you money.

Another 10 years or so and you guys will try and spin the fact that you ever resisted man made global warming. You're always wrong. You can set your watch to it.

Pretty soon? They are already proven wrong. It can't be helped that some folks are just in denial about facts in evidence. Here are some more:

The Top 10 Global-Warming Facts

1. It's more than 90% sure; humans cause global warming
That was the unanimous conclusion in a recent report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC authors includes scientists and official government participants from 40 countries, including the US. Predictive models agree with observed temperatures only when anthropogenic effects are included.

2. Eleven of last 12 years were the hottest ever recorded
That's since 1850. And the high temperatures of the last 50 years are unusual for at least the last 1300 years. Global Warming is real!

3. We are dumping about 1000 tons of CO2 per second into the atmosphere Current rates of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere are unprecedented. Carbon dioxide emissions are mostly from burning fossil fuels.

4. Current greenhouse gas levels are far higher than for the previous 650,000 years
The current atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide is 35% greater than pre-industrial levels. Methane concentrations have increased by 250%. These dramatic increases in greenhouse gases are human-caused.

5. Global warming produces severe weather and rising seas.
Warming oceans and melting ice have caused the sea level to rise at a rate unprecedented in the last 3000 years. Other changes associated with warming include increased incidences of drought, flooding, heat waves, and intense cyclones.

6. Global warming effects are predicted to get much worse
By 2100, global temperatures will increase another 2 to 11 °F. Increases are predicted in heat waves, drought, intense cyclones, and loss of coastal and low areas.

7. Global warming will affect millions of people by 2100
Loss of habitable land is predicted to result from flooding and droughts. Increases are predicted in heat-caused deaths, famines, drinking water scarcity, disease, and forest fires.

8. 25% of the world's species could be lost from global warming effects
More than 1 million plant and animal species will vanish if global temperatures continue to rise as predicted in the next 50 years.

9. China plans to build about one coal-fired electrical power plant per week over a period of a decade
The US currently emits more greenhouse gases than any other nation, but China will soon pass the US as the worst greenhouse gas emitter.

10. It's too late to stop global warming, but we can limit it
Models show that limiting greenhouse gas emissions can prevent the most extreme scenarios for global warming.

Nah, 10 years from now the scientists that are crying "global warming" will be crying "there's an ice age coming" just like they were 15 or 20 years ago.

It's ALL about $$$'s.

They'll tout whatever position gets them the most funding. Plain and simple.

Blame communist China for pollution.

Environmentalist whackos have us hamstrung here..at least for the moment.

Herb

Herb writes:

The left says no to nuclear power.
The left says no to liquified natural gas.
The left says no to coal.
The left says no to cutting trees.
The left says no to Alaskan Oil.

And then the left complains about our reliance on foreign energy.


Actually Herb, this liberal supports three out of the five things you listed, plus I think we should be making more ethanol. I'm glad you show some concern about our reliance on foreign oil. Usually, your side shows little or no concern about this. What gets me is the fact we export a lot of oil we pump right here in the good ol USA. We should be keeping OUR fuels here for OUR use and your side says absolutely nothing about THIS. We don't need to pump in Alaska, we just need to keep our own supply at home. It's just about your side protecting the rich, WHICH is what it's always about on your side.

More ethanol? Have you noticed the rises in corn and rice prices worldwide.

Both directly attributed to the reduction if corn and rice for food, because it is being diverted to ethanol production.

'We should be keeping OUR fuels here for OUR use..'

Agreed.

Herb

Herbie says "Environmentalist whackos have us hamstrung here"

No. Ignorant Republican leaders are the ones who are holding up progress.

December 13th, 2007
"The House passed an energy bill last week, which is a solid piece of legislation. It included the first increase in federal fuel efficiency standards in three decades, encourages the use of renewable energy sources, and rolls back $13.5 billion in tax breaks for the five largest U.S. oil companies, redirecting the money into conservation and development of renewable fuels.

Last week, Dems tried to quickly move the bill onto the White House, but came up short after a Republican filibuster over a provision that requires electric utilities to get some of its power from renewable energy. This morning, the Senate minority blocked the bill again, insisting that oil companies keep billions of dollars in tax breaks.

Republicans were able to stall a broad energy bill in the Senate on Thursday morning, prompting Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader, to excise controversial parts of the measure in hopes of moving the legislation forward quickly.

The unsuccessful move to advance the bill failed by one vote. Supporters managed to get 59 “yes” votes, but 60 were needed to invoke cloture, or move to consideration of the bill itself. Forty senators voted “no.” The only senator not voting was John McCain, Republican of Arizona, who is campaigning for president in Iowa.

Among other things, the bill would require automakers to meet a fleet average of 35 miles a gallon by 2020, up from the current 25 miles per gallon. Supporters of the legislation hail it as the first meaningful improvement in fuel-efficiency standards in three decades."

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13916.html

Global Warming doesn't exist. You want proof? It snowed in Canada. Uh huh. Case closed.

That should put all the questions to rest. Thanks Herb.

So If I can quote or cite another warm weather story, you will believe that climate change is an issue?

No. Of course not. Because that would be retarded.

The Tax Breaks for the Oil companies, are to encourage them to increase production, in areas that aren't usually economically feasible.

Now the Demo's want to go back on their word, and drop the incentivies, decreasing oil production in the US.

Said Tax Breaks are unnecessary for an industry that has been reporting record profits quarter after quarter. Clearly, they are dragging their feet on alternative energy research, since success would be just shooting themselves in the foot.

This money could be more wisely spent on companies that really are interested in doing the job.

"It snowed in Canada."

No. You don't get off that easy.

It snowed a LOT in Canada VERY LATE IN THE YEAR.

The left had to move off the global warming term because they couldn't prove it. Now it's 'climate change.'

There are plenty of beneficial effects from global warming. We'll grow more food to feed the starving and require less heat for millions.

Herb

Herb, you make no sense. It is clear you don't know what you are writing about and wish to spin lies just to save what's left of your non-reputation. I'll put my faith in facts, not right wing nut job innuendo.

The systems that produce the world's food supply are heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Vast amounts of oil and gas are used as raw materials and energy in the manufacture of fertilisers and pesticides, and as cheap and readily available energy at all stages of food production: from planting, irrigation, feeding and harvesting, through to processing, distribution and packaging. In addition, fossil fuels are essential in the construction and the repair of equipment and infrastructure needed to facilitate this industry, including farm machinery, processing facilities, storage, ships, trucks and roads. The industrial food supply system is one of the biggest consumers of fossil fuels and one of the greatest producers of greenhouse gases.

Ironically, the food industry is at serious risk from global warming caused by these greenhouse gases, through the disruption of the predictable climactic cycles on which agriculture depends. But global warming can have the more pronounced and immediate effect of exacerbating existing environmental threats to agriculture, many of which are caused by industrial agriculture itself. Environmental degradation, water shortages, salination, soil erosion, pests, disease and desertification all pose serious threats to our food supply, and are made worse by climate change. But many of the conventional ways used to overcome these environmental problems further increase the consumption of finite oil and gas reserves. Thus the cycle of oil dependence and environmental degradation continues.

Industrial agriculture and the systems of food supply are also responsible for the erosion of communities throughout the world. This social degradation is compounded by trade rules and policies, by the profit driven mindset of the industry, and by the lack of knowledge of the faults of the current systems and the possibilities of alternatives. But the globalisation and corporate control that seriously threaten society and the stability of our environment are only possible because cheap energy is used to replace labour and allows the distance between producer and consumer to be extended.

http://www.powerswitch.org.uk/portal/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=563

I'm glad we found a place for the soon-to-be-homeless polar bears -- Herb and NWokies' apartments.

You're right. It snowed ALOT in Canada - VERY LATE IN THE YEAR.

So if I can show you something unusually hot you will reconsider your position?

" There are plenty of beneficial effects from global warming."

Wait - are you saying that it's an issue or not? In one breath you try and point out how absurd it is to believe in global warming - then you use it to say that it is a good thing and that you welcome it.

Which is it? Is it real or not?

Why don't you just say what you believe, clearly and without implying anything - just SAY it, and stick to that instead of talking out of both sides of your mouth?

And by the way, the ability for some new areas to grow bananas and nuts will not offset the highly detrimental effects that are happening today. And as of last week, FINALLY, the Bush administration is showing signs of " coming around ." Just like McCain said " Sometimes it takes us a little longer to do what is right." This is, yet again, another example of a thing that Republicans wish to drag their feet on because they believe in a higher power that could not possibly be effected by humans. And science is bad and evil.

Go on a quest for fire and burn another witch. I'm so sick of your puritanical bullshit. You cling to your gun adn religion. You'll have that as your daughter becomes diseased and hatches new environmentally caused ailments that you could have prevented. Join a sect. PLEASE.

"So if I can show you something unusually hot you will reconsider your position?"

I'm open to new information. Just not this idiotic 'sky is falling' bologna.

Ever stop to consider that plenty of people make money off this global warming hype? Follow the money, and it's not all in oil.

Herb

No problem, if it ever happens, a FEMA representative will show up, at the north poll, and every Polar Bear that fills out the correct form (In triplicate), will receive a relocation allowance.

" "So if I can show you something unusually hot you will reconsider your position?"

I'm open to new information. Just not this idiotic 'sky is falling' bologna."

Herb, my point is that being able to point to some kind of specific weather thing - and not look at other things - is a bad way to get your information. But I appreciate you willingness to feign open-midedness.

By the way, who is making money off of Global Warming hype? Where does the money take me? Scientists? Government officials? Companies? Who. specifically? You make it sounds like it's so obvious. Please show me. I do not believe you.

Herboid: "I'm open to new information."

No, you are not. We can post new information and we do, and all you do is ignore it, claim it's conspiratorial, refute it with your tainted whiny born again opinions or segue tangentially to make it appear as if you are staying on topic.

Herb, you do do that a lot. You should stop doing that.

Herb-
The book "Clean Tech Revolution" has loads of solutions that are going on right now and what is being developed for the future.

The sky is not falling, however our man-made pollution has added to some very stressful environmental problems that you are turning a blind eye too.

"...who is making money off of Global Warming hype?"

You're kidding, right?

Anyone who wants an audience.
Fear sells.
Attorneys who sue corporations and the government.
Anyone who write books, sell newspapers, movies and television shows.
And on and on and on.
I wouldn't be surprised if the dastardly aclu and naral are in there somewhere as well.
Fellow travelers, all.

The question should be 'Who DOESN'T make money off of global warming hype?'

Herb

You label all the evidence as "hype." Now, if you selectively presented counter evidence, laid out an argument in opposition and drew conclusions from that presentation you would have something credible.

Guess what? All you do is say no. Saying fear sells is not an argument in opposition. Every day your credibility falls to a new low.

Herb do you just fill your pants every morning with crap or does it happen throughout your daily routine?

What's pathetic is that those that most ardently believe in talking snakes somehow are unable to be convinced of scientific facts. Where's the logic in that belief system?

Herb's thinking is not based in logic, it is based in faith. Not just faith in his interpretation of The Almighty, but faith in his twisted interpretation of the writings of history. Had the New Testament specifically stated "Thou shalt not fill your pants with crap every morning" he would fill them with baloney instead. But he would still reject the effects man has had on our planet. To people like Herb, everything will just take care of itself. It's Reaganism at its worst. Actually Herb is only for government intervention when the plan is to remove freedom of choice.
Hypocritical in my view. We're never going to change Herb, but it is our duty to continue to point out how invalid his positions are.

""...who is making money off of Global Warming hype?"

You're kidding, right?"

No. And your answer to my question is " ACLU, NARAL, newspapers and authors and attorneys."

Thanks. Yes. It's a conspiracy between those groups to fool the entire globe and falsify scientific evidence so they can sell books. It's all a big boondoggle. It's not really happening. It's ALL a lie. No truth at all.

Got it.

"Herb's thinking is not based in logic, it is based in faith."

Close, but no Havana...at least not until Mr. Castro and his ilk are gone.

My thinking is based on both logic and faith.
If you were so kind as to allow me to flatter myself, think of Ol' Herb as C.S. Lewis, Jr.'

Herb

"hink of Ol' Herb as C.S. Lewis, Jr.' "

Not only are you insulting CS Lewis but God too.

Your audacity is only trumped by your inflated ego.

Yeah, I didn't expect any grace from this crowd, hence the 'If you were so kind as to allow me to flatter myself.'

Herb

"My thinking is based on both logic and faith."

You mean illogic and faith.
There is no logic in the sum and total of what you have expressed.
The dictionary defines logic as "reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity."

You refuse to validate your postings. You express opinion on logic like it WAS faith, but logic is NOT faith. Logic is a particular system or codification of the principles of proof and inference.
If faith were logical, it wouldn't be what it is or claims to be.

All you do is opine about facts in evidence that are contrary to your faith beliefs directly or indirectly.

http://www.americanpolicy.org/un/thereisnoglobal.htm

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/lav2006forWeb.pdf

http://www.biblebelievers.com/Gipp/GippEssay8.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5086

The main difference between the secular leftist and me is that the leftist worships the created, and I worship the Creator.

Herb

Herb, do you believe those articles to be true and accurate?

It's a simple question.

Oh yeah baby here come the URL's when all else fails.

I just want to know if he even believes them...or even read them.

It's my intuition that Herb delights in being the rub on these posts. It may truly be the only thing to grace his ego in a day.

"Herb, do you believe those articles to be true and accurate?"

Likely more accurate than anything the left churns out.

Herb

There's an old time gospel tune that opens up with the phrase "Dig, Dig, Dig a little deeper.."

Just keep digging deeper Herb that way your pant legs don't hit the crap.

"Herb, do you believe those articles to be true and accurate?"

Likely more accurate than anything the left churns out.

So is that a " yes."?

Herb's Favorite Movie

The left says no to liquified natural gas.

WTF?
I really want some of those drugs that Herb is on!
Herb ONLY believes what is on EXTREME RIGHT RADICAL websites and talk shows.


Yeah, I didn't expect any grace from this crowd, hence the 'If you were so kind as to allow me to flatter myself.'

WTF? MORE asinine comments....

"I really want some of those drugs that Herb is on!"

If it's not Stella, then it's nothing.

Herb

NO! It's more like Trazadone,Desyrel or Venlafaxine for you Herb....
And for your EXTREME RIGHT views I'd take haloperidol (Haldol), fluphenazine (Prolixin), thiothixene (Navane), trifluoperazine (Stelazine), perphenazine (Trilafon), and thioridazine (Mellaril).
ALL at the same time. You might just end up human once again.

Herb, I am proud to be a part of the left and this is what you had to say about this topic.

The left says no to nuclear power.
The left says no to liquified natural gas.
The left says no to coal.
The left says no to cutting trees.
The left says no to Alaskan Oil.

And then the left complains about our reliance on foreign energy.

I fully support as a liberal leftest nuclear power in this country and other developed nations.

I fully support logging as long as it is not old growth or clear cutting & just for the sake of making a buck.

Alaskan Oil is ok as long as it is just to help with the withdrawl from foriegn oil.

Check out the book The Long Emergency because that is indeed what we are instore for a Very Long Emergency.

And to my hippie counterparts in the Gorge stop bitching about the wind farms and support them fully. The not in my backyard attitude and the "but they will ruin the scenic beauty" is pure bullshit.

Call me a neo hippy but oh well.

I think the "global warming" is just a natural cycle that the earth has gone thru for a gazillion years.

I totally agree with this but my above statements and this have nothing to do with one another. Both are equally important but have little in common with one another.

I drove up thru the Gorge a couple of weeks ago and noticed it was very windy.

Was it because of all those huge fans running up on the hills?

#1. I happen to believe in God. Doing so doesn't mean that I cannot believe that we, as humans, are having an effect on the planet that involves rising temperatures, pollution and potentially dire consequences for our actions.

#2. I would honestly LOVE to be proven wrong about what I believe about global warming. And I'm going to just use that phrase. I do not wish this to happen to the degree we are being warned about. But to have faith in something like God - which takes FAITH - yet deny actual evidence that I believe to be true about Global Warming feels very inconsistent. The premise that humans cannot have enough of an impact on Earth to the degree we are talking about here is less likely, to me, than believing in God. There is much MORE evidence to support Global Warming than there is God. At least, more things that I can wrap my mind around. God takes a lot of faith. Global Warming does too. I believe this age will be looked upon a challenge of all sorts of beliefs. I'm glad I get to hash them out in a world that challenges us. However, I fear that there is too much of a chance that people why deny that Global Warming is an issue, are wrong.

Rambling - sorry.

Y'know what I find odd? How the left, environmentally-friendly folks here whine about nuclear power.

Europe, much farther to the left than us in about every aspect including environmentalism, is mostly nuclear powered.

People are worried about another Three Mile Island (falling asleep at the switch) or Chernobyl (a Soviet design clusterfuck). Really, the only two accidents, and Three Mile Island's impact was pretty much purely psychological.

It's something to consider. Yes reactors are expensive as hell to build, but it's a very efficient energy source, environmentally clean (of course with no leaks) ... and if it reduces our reliance on foreign oil, coal, and hydroelectric power, it's worth considering.

IMHO.

I think that is a mindset that will change sooner than later. It's usually about dealing with the waste. I'm sure it's comething that will be looked at again and closer. At least, I hope so. I can't say that I have a strong feeling one way or another about Nuclear as I just don't know very much about all that it involves.

It SEEMS like there should be new technologies on the horizon that would be cleaner though. SEEMS.

I vote for solar. It's one of the cleanest. It does have heavy infrastructure build out costs though. Returns are good once done, and that's a plus.

We've lots of places appropriate for this kind of power to be generated with little overall impact.

One very nice thing is a low and easily managed environmental impact. One very bad thing is it's seasonal nature and it does not work at night, meaning it's either got to be stored, or used during daytime.

Still, all the stored energy we have in oil was built up by sunlight. When that runs out, we will be hurting big. Better to capture what we can and be better off.

"You might just end up human once again."

Get back to us once Al Gore and Bobby Kennedy Jr. stop spewing carbon from their private jets.

Whine on.

Herb

I could care NOT for those guys. Get back to us when YOUR brainwashing neo-CONer EXTREME RIGHT buddies keep thinking that the Earth is a DUMPING ground.


"You might just end up human once again."

Read the above to yourself everyday....

Herb points the finger so well at others but not at thyself. Typical and sad when faced with facts.

"YOUR brainwashing neo-CONer EXTREME RIGHT buddies keep thinking that the Earth is a DUMPING ground."

It's not my conservative buddies who are the hypocrites. It's your leftist pals.

Like Mr. Clinton, Al Gore shakes his finger in our face and does exactly what he says we shouldn't do.

Hand wring all you want. Just follow the $.

Herb

Problem is Herb it doesn't matter if they're Herbocrites YOUR EXTREME RIGHT WING neo-CONers don't even give a shit!


Just follow the $.

Right into DUHbya and the DICKsters pockets....

Yeah. There aren't any significant dollars effecting world policy on this issue. We've already addressed that. Or, at least, I have. You still claim it - but it's not true.

Why do we continue to waste time and energy (ha!) on Herrbocrite's ridiculous attempts to incite riots over his irrelevant or insignificant sources of troll bait.

Resist the hot air popper, people! There's no butter! No reward!

Happy Earth Day!

Why do we continue to waste time and energy (ha!) on Herrbocrite's ridiculous attempts to incite riots over his irrelevant or insignificant sources of troll bait.


So we can CONTINUE to tell him how much a FLAWED President Nixon was.

No liberal here will even acknowledge the left's hypocrisy on the joke of man-made 'global warming.'

But when your own komrades like Roberty Kennedy, Jr. and Al Gore spew far more carbon than Nwokie, Deane or Herb ever will, whilst lecturing us about reducing carbon emissions, that's the biggest joke of all.

The left has NO credibility. At least conservatives are intellectually honest.

Herb

The person who has no credibility is the one that refuses to see the facts as given by thousands of scientists worldwide that know a hell of a lot more than you do about global warming.

And if you want to talk about jokes, the joke's on you Herb, whilst you lecture us about abortion yet openly support the slaughter of both our US troops and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's for a war that was completely unnecessary.

I can't wait for Karl Rove to begin running campaign ads.

In continuing to give such 'global warming' hypocrites a pass, leftists only set themselves up for another failed race in November.

What a complete and utter joke.

Herb

Herb, better check your facts bud. Unlike the knuckledragging right, Mr. McCain has acknowledged that global warming exists and is a threat to mankind. So, Karl Rove will have to find some other campaign ads to run. And may I suggest that he run ads to seperate McCain from Bush. Global warming will be the least of his worries come November.

What a complete and utter joke.

McCain is!

You CAN'T polish a turd

"What a complete and utter joke.
McCain is!"

Wait a minute. Just a few days ago, Mr. McCain was 'your guy.'

Do you ever tell the truth?

Herb

It doesn't look good for my guy...

The man that calls his wife a CU@T!!!!


Do you ever tell the truth?

Do you? You supposedly put it down for all of us here to read but it's usually half truths or blatant lies.

No, Trixter.

I just called you on your own statement.

You've been saying McCain is 'your guy.'

Now you belittle him.

Which is it, Mr. pants on fire?

Herb

It doesn't look good for my guy does it Herbocrite???
The guy called his wife a CUN#!!!!!!!!!!!

Early on, Trixter was a big McCain supporter. Now that he's in the running, the crap came out.

You might not know it, but a turd in a nice box is still a turd. It all comes out in the end!

The McCain box is open. We already know the smell.

I was a McCain supporter because he talked a game of CHANGE away from what DUHbya and Co. were/are doing in America. Now that he has FLIP-FLOPPED and is going to follow along the same lines as DUHbya and Co. I have lost TONS of respect for Johnny Mc.
And the fact that he ACTUALLY called his wife a CUN# is just wrong!

Maybe she is. I mean, there has to be ONE out there. Maybe she's the one.

Its Ann Coulter. She's the one.

Skep hits the nail on the head....

OK.

2.

2. "Doctor" Laura.

This discussion is funny and sad to read. Here you have some questions that are hard to answer: namely, what are the costs vs. benefits of various human activities and what things would people be willing to give up. I think that it is pure folly to think that any kind of human society (industrialized or not) could exist with zero environmental impact.

Since measuring the impact of any given activity is not easy and since there are many different things that could be given up, it is almost guaranteed that these discussions are going to turn into the arguing and finger-pointing that we see here. It is easy to tell other people that they have to change their ways as long as it doesn't impact your own creature comforts. Just remember that when you point a finger, there are three fingers pointing back at you!

By the way, although a lot of emphasis seems to get placed on the burning of fossil fuels in motor vehicles, what about the environmental impact of:

* Disposable electronic devices (both from their manufacture and disposal)?
* Energy consumption of all of the infrastructure equipment that powers the Internet?
* "Convenience" disposable items that could be replaced with reusable alternatives (examples: diapers, styrofoam plates, plastic silverware)
...etc.

By the way, I am really tickled to see that in addition to being Richard M. Nixon II, Herb has taken it upon himself to assume the role of C.S. Lewis II. Keep tilting at that windmill, my friend!

"Herb has taken it upon himself to assume the role of C.S. Lewis II."

Wrong.

I knew the atheistic left would have a field day with any such comparison, even though they don't believe in God, or share the influential Biblical worldview of C.S. Lewis. Nevertheless, my post was chock-full of qualifiers:

IF YOU WERE SO KIND AS TO ALLOW ME TO FLATTER MYSELF, think of Ol' Herb as C.S. Lewis, Jr.'

Spin your own windmills. Then watch 'Shadowlands,' which is one of Ol' Herb's Desert Island Videos. That oughta sprout a new thread, right there. Top 10 DIV's.

Herb

Herb, did you even glance at this?

Aw, it's a bunch of leftist environmentalists who happen to call themselves Christians. And if they are, great.

But the real stewards are the fishermen and fisherwomen, the hunters and the loggers. Jesus was a carpenter/woodworker, not some Tre Arrow wannabe.

They know what stewardship is. Rather than let a tree be infested with disease, or burn down with a forest fire, it makes more sense to harvest 1 then plant 2, or 10, or 100 more.

Renewable resources are axiomatically renewable.

Politically, many so-called environmentalists align with peace-niks who would sell Israel and our nation out in a minute...all in the name of 'getting along.' No different than England's Neville Chamberlain in WWII.

Herb

And politically, most of them align with peace-niks who would sell Israel and our nation out in a minute...

Like neo-CON EXTREME RIGHTIES that sell out OUR country to the lowest bidders!!!! Or Pinko COMMIES like China!!!!!

YOUR way or the highway huh Herb. Just like an EXTREMIST! That's all YOU are Herbocrite.

"Like neo-CON EXTREME RIGHTIES that sell out OUR country to the lowest bidders!!!!"

No.

You must be referring to Mr. Clinton:

http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/31299GoreFault.pdf

NO!
Like the DUHbya administration has done over the last 8 years!

Aw, it's a bunch of leftist environmentalists who happen to call themselves Christians."

"Despite opposition from some of their colleagues, 86 evangelical Christian leaders have decided to back a major initiative to fight global warming, saying "millions of people could die in this century because of climate change, most of them our poorest global neighbors."

Among signers of the statement, which will be released in Washington on Wednesday, are the presidents of 39 evangelical colleges, leaders of aid groups and churches..."

Source

What about this???

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2005/09/29/opinion/commentary/18_38_109_28_05.tx t

Ok, Andy.

You got me on that one.

From what I've read, Rick Warren is one incredibly awesome dude. I seem to recall that when he visited a terrorist country a few years back, he may have downplayed the human rights situation there, but while in country, who wouldn't? I also don't think he's a terrorist sympathizer and rather, he appears to be a man of deep faith.

http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/647761506.html

We're all human, and I respect Mr. Warren.

Herb

> IF YOU WERE SO KIND AS TO ALLOW ME TO FLATTER
> MYSELF, think of Ol' Herb as C.S. Lewis, Jr.'

So this was meant to be tongue-in-cheek? I don't get the joke. All that I can say is that I couldn't bring myself to type a statement implying a comparison between myself and any historical personage because I believe that I still fall very far short of any accomplishment or proficiency level worthy of historical note.

Hence the term "Allow me to flatter myself."

Bash Ol' Herb all you want. You've got nothing on this one.

Herb

All out of answers Herb....?

All out of answering to prattling leftists.

Give me a legit question and you get a legit answer.

But unlike Mr. Gorbachev, unrepentant American leftists will never concede their commie ways, so don't expect me to waste time with your socialist agendae.

Herb

Give me a legit question and you get a legit answer.

LOL!


But unlike Mr. Gorbachev, unrepentant American leftists will never concede their commie ways, so don't expect me to waste time with your socialist agenda.


How about YOUR MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY Facisist ways?

Look.

If Mr. Gorbachev could change, maybe American leftists should consider it.

Earth to Trixter: Communism doesn't work.

I'm registered Libertarian. How does this make me a "prattling leftist" with "commie ways?"

Aw, there are commie republicans.

Herb

Earth to Herb: Totalitarianism does not work either.

Baa-ram-ewe, baa-ram-ewe. To your breed, your fleece, your clan be true. Sheep be true. Baa-ram-ewe.

Who's talking about totalitarianism?

As my French pals say, "Non moi."

Herb

Earth to Herbocrite: FASCISM doesn't work. Cramming YOUR way down everyone's throat isn't the answer. If you want a DICKtatorship then Ill your cup of tea.
I will help YOU pack.

It's a free country, one that elected Mr. Nixon, Mr. Reagan and Mr. G.W. Bush, all TWICE.

Get over it.

And don't blame me just because your democrat-led congress couldn't legislate itself out of a wet paper bag.

Herb

don't blame me just because your democrat-led congress

NOT MINE!

Thanks for being a fascist Herb...

> Aw, there are commie republicans.

I see, nobody is safe!! Is there some way that I can be audited for Communist tendencies? I don't want to inadvertently become complicit in campaigning for the Communist cause.

Bush: Selected, then elected!

Remember, the Supreme Court picked him, leaving voters in Florida without their votes being counted.

I'll just keep saying it. Someday it might sink in Herb. Someday.

At the least, anybody reading knows that talker is debunked HUGE.

"Is there some way that I can be audited for Communist tendencies?"

Naw, Alfredo_t.

By virtue of the fact you even asked the question, you're a good egg in my book.

But for those keeping score at home, how one views the Second Amendment is a fairly good indicator of how pinko someone is likely to go. The first thing the dastardly types do is to confiscate guns.

Those okay with the 2nd Amendment are pretty safe and not as likely to sign off on the kind of socialist stuff that Hitler, Castro, Mao and Stalin pushed.

Remember: Hitler was a nazi, a national socialist.

Herb

"Hitler was a nazi, a national socialist."

Ah yes, so by your logic, then we must all by nazi's?

You're as pathetic as they come, and paranoid to boot. Get a grip.

"..so by your logic, then we must all by nazi's?"

No.

Those quick to call conservatives fascists should keep a closer eye on their socialist komrades.

Herb

I don't know of any socialist comrades here.

Some get pretty close.

Hardly. Don't confuse compassion for fellow man with socialism.

Oh, it's often dressed up as compassion. Better to be like a Minuteman. For by the time one determines evil motives, it's oft too late.

'From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.' Karl Marx

Plus, Hitler liked animals and Il Duce made the trains run on time.

Herb

P.S. I miss Nwokie.

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

Wow, does that every seem familiar. Now, let me think, where do I see posts reflecting that kind of thinking. Mmmmmmm, it'll come to me.

Herb, quit posting in absolutes. It makes you look bad.

Just like Deane, you guys put labels on stuff and avoid answering the tough questions completely. Sociology is not a digital science. You can't categorize everyone and everything to one extreme or the other. Life is color for most of us, although I have always thought the more conservative one's politics are, the smaller the grey scale becomes, eventually removing all color and becoming a world of black and white. You both do yourself a disservice since it hinders your communication ability especially when the audience is composed of opinion over the complete gamut. Step up a notch. Don't revise history into a simple paradigm. There is no template. Even social conservatism has many divisions. Say what you feel but don't think that your really getting a good point across when you diminish your own intellect with the kind to tripe you often put up here.

"P.S. I miss Nwokie."

Of course you do. Frauds tend to align with other frauds.

Some get pretty close.

And some of you neo-CONers on here get pretty darn close to fascism....