Added: 2 years ago
From: golefttv
Views: 669
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (15)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Its pretty simple. First, it is not clear that the globe is even warming. Second, even if it was known to be warming it isn't known that it is our fault.

    It seems almost ridiculous to end a debate with so few words, but there you have it. You want to continue research, I don't think anyone is against that. You want to attempt to put a gun to peoples heads, call them backwards hicks while throwing a tantrum every time you are presented with facts...well, that is another way to end debate.

  • Yes, it is quite simple. The scientific consensus among climatologists is that the earth is warming, that it's anthropogenic, and that the consequences are going to be potentially very severe. If climate skeptics would actually read the peer reviewed literature rather than relying on non-peer reviewed papers, the media, the blogosphere and cherry picked data, they would know this.

  • Talk about a stupidity gradient! Look at the posts below:

  • Workers of the world unite!

  • 6th grade level?

    Right wingers do not advocate doing "nothing"

    They Simply don't agree with "skyrocketing" energy prices which will reverberate through every sector in social life.

    Every aspect of society will "necessarily" cost more to operate.

    Schools, grocery stores, diaper production, hospital operation, mail systems, fast food, showers, clothing production & sales, radio & T.V. production & broadcasting, glass, plastics, wood, steel...

    Every aspect of life as we know it will COST more-

  • More expensive vs killing the planet...Hmmmm.

  • Is that supposed to be an intelligent reply, or more proof that your political opinions cannot be taken seriously.

  • If the planet is destroyed, I doubt such trivial matters as economic philosophy will really matter much, though it is funny how you derive that from my short responses.

    If it is not for our government to protect us from large scale disaster, then who's is it? I am pretty sure that when they wrote the constitution & said "General Defense", disasters was one of those things they had in mind.

    We could do more, & should, Immediately. Those against it should be ignored as scientific morons.

  • Good for you, now keep reading, try peer reviewed scientific studies. See what conclusions you derive from those...

    ;-p

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more