yeah go Fred Thompson. it's a bully style question crafted to shame the participants into caving to liberal agenda. it's also insulting. that's what you ask a 3rd grade class to do, not a panel of statesmen.
WThe reason you ask POLITICIANS yes-no questions is because they NEVER answer the real questions posed to them. Ask about Global Warming and they're off on some tangent about the sky being blue. (According to Rudy, it's due to 9/11.)
Fred was offended because the moderator wanted a yes-no answer. Well, maybe she wouldn't ask questions like that if the candidates would start answering questions like real people, instead of double talk and lawyer speak.
Assumptions? Obviously you know nothing about science. There is uncertainty and I have been skeptical of certain aspects of climate change myself, but saying its based on assuptions is entirely wrong.
However, I do agree that Fred's response was masterful, and the question should not have been asked in a "yes/no" manner.
Besides, if its a Democratic talking point, why do McCain and Guiliani beleive that the dangers are real?
The scientific method requires review and a control. How can you have a control with climate change. How can you even measure what's going on, given the very small window we have into the system.
The answer is you can't. You have to make a model and make assumptions.
If they can't predict how many hurricanes will happen next year, how can they say what the long term trend is.
Long term trends, such was global warming, are actually much easier to predict than short term things like the weather. The reason for this lies within the study of mathematical chaos. But don't take my word for it, there is a lot of available reading on this topic, as it has been addressed already by many scientists.
Do you understand the theory of mathematical chaos (the butterfly effect)? Basically, it says that very little deltas can have enormous affects on the outcome, the opposite of what you are saying.
the butterfly effect is so called by the romantic notion that a butterfly flapping its wings can cause a tornado miles away and days later.
Also, most climate modelers agree that while the models are not entirely accurate, that more accurate models would not give largely different results. If there was a serious problem with climate modeling, there would not be thousands of modelers out there employed by the nation's best universities and science programs.
Glad to see Fred put her in her place. What he did has nothing to do with Global Warming, but more about reacting in a powerful way to a Democrat talking point.
The causes, consequences, and proposed remedies for Global Warming transcends political parties. That John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney (and to a lesser extent, Alan Keyes) have gone on record as saying that human-contributed Global Warming is real and that there should be something done about it shows this to be a fact.
The overwhelming theme of this debate (and of this entire campaign) is the Republican contenders' unilateral rush away from the "legacy" of the Bush Administration.
Fred Thompson's petulant obstructionism aside, it's worth noting that All Four Republican Frontrunners (and no one else) raised their hands before they heard what Fred said. (Even though Romney and Huckabee only raised them halfway, and Romney brought his hand down as quickly as possible.)
What does that say about the candidates, do you think? Could there be a correlation?
P.S. I was surprised that Ron Paul did not raise his hand. Shame. I had always kind of liked him.
A rather odd approach to a debate, asking for a show of hands and then not wanting to hear any explanation from the candidates. What was the moderator afraid of? Does she not understand that a debate is a discussion/argument of a subject?
Worst debate in American history. CNN has now earned the right to be the most "laughable" news organization on TV. Where did they find this moderator? Why doesn't CNN treat the Democratic hopefuls this way?
Wrong. Why is global warming happening on Pluto and Mars? The sun has a cycle of low/high output and it is being completely ignored by the algorians because it would take humanity out of climate change. Humans MAY BE changing the globe, but is that a bad thing even? Are we preventing a new ice age? There is no need for fatalism.
That's even more reason to limit our green house gas production. The increase in solar activity may be a contributor to global warming however there is not much we can do to change the sun. What we CAN do is decrease our carbon footprint and decrease the impact man has on our climate.
"is that a bad thing?"
I'll let you know when the ice in Antarctica melts and floods all our cities on the coast.
But again, you are making an extremely hyperbolic statement from an unproven cause/effect. It is good to decrease CO2, no one is arguing that decreasing pollution is a GREAT THING! However, saying that we are going to melt Antarctica is irresponsible.
Well, since 96% of all greenhouse gases are water vapor and thereby uncontrollable, what is there to say? To point man out as the destroyer of all and creator of nothing destroys his greatness.
Where did your 96% come from? It's really less than 66%, and as low as 33% when water vapor condenses into clouds, rain, and snow. CO2 contributes as much as 25% of the greenhouse effect and it is well within agreement with the physics of the greenhouse effect that the increased atmospheric concentration since the industrial revolution (280 ppm to the current 380 ppm) to attribute the observed temperature increase to this cause.
Oh, my. I get that the moderator is trying to run a tight ship. This doesn't mean, though, that she should treat these presidential hopefuls so rudely. Truthfully, she's a mess.
He beat everyone else in this debate, and they avoided asking him questions because he could knock down any other candidate and EVEN the moderator, which no other RINO has the balls to do.
Yeah, these debates are insanely biased against certain candidates. I think Fred got the least time out of anybody...barely edged out by Ron Paul. Seriously though, how do you think Fred's campaign is doing?
Yes, I do. Ron Paul is a squeaky Texan fringe candidate who has no chance of winning. He has constantly trailed in the polls and is usually accompanied by trolling 'truther' types who think that every candidate other than him is the spawn of satan. Of course, the media encourages all the hype because they know he can't win and somewhat mimics another strange Texan fellah from '92 that instilled Clinton.
@s7rugg1e ROMNEY'S 2012 PLAN CUTS MEDICARE--Ron Paul’s plan cuts $1 trillion the first year & balances the budget in 3 years. The plan cuts spending by ending the costly foreign wars, and cuts foreign welfare, corporate welfare, and overgrown federal bureaucracy. These cuts are made so that those who are dependent on domestic spending programs such as Medicare aren’t endangered through a sudden change in benefits. Romney’s plan cuts Medicare, on which many elderly Americans rely.
mcLame is the worst POS RINO in history. He's the anti-conservative who panders to the dc crowd of entrenched, career politicos.
kickyerass 6 months ago
Republicans don't care about the environment, they think Jesus is coming back soon.
loonmaniac 1 year ago
yeah go Fred Thompson. it's a bully style question crafted to shame the participants into caving to liberal agenda. it's also insulting. that's what you ask a 3rd grade class to do, not a panel of statesmen.
shuhouse25 3 years ago
That woman was so ugly and stupid. I wish someone would shoot her.
scarecrow027 3 years ago
there is only a debate because big companies love polluting, and who sticks up for big business more than republicans?
Tuppington 3 years ago
"let's not put a burden on us alone and let the rest of the world skate by without participating in the effort."
That's rich. Because of Bush, we are the ONLY G8 country that isn't participating in the effort. Let's START DOING OUR PART.
kihadat 4 years ago
ron paul 2008
Patriot2572 4 years ago
NEVER VOTE FOR FRED
godishealer 4 years ago
Treat them like school children. "Raise your hand if you believe in global warming!" "I do! I do!!!"
How demeaning.
edbarbarg 4 years ago
WThe reason you ask POLITICIANS yes-no questions is because they NEVER answer the real questions posed to them. Ask about Global Warming and they're off on some tangent about the sky being blue. (According to Rudy, it's due to 9/11.)
Fred was offended because the moderator wanted a yes-no answer. Well, maybe she wouldn't ask questions like that if the candidates would start answering questions like real people, instead of double talk and lawyer speak.
Cornplanter 4 years ago
No one knows for certain why Global Warming is happening (it's all models and assumptions).
This question is a Democrat chicken little talking point designed to demean the candidates.
If candidates don't answer questions when given a real opportunity then make your decision.
edbarbarg 4 years ago
Assumptions? Obviously you know nothing about science. There is uncertainty and I have been skeptical of certain aspects of climate change myself, but saying its based on assuptions is entirely wrong.
However, I do agree that Fred's response was masterful, and the question should not have been asked in a "yes/no" manner.
Besides, if its a Democratic talking point, why do McCain and Guiliani beleive that the dangers are real?
art1vand3lay 4 years ago
The scientific method requires review and a control. How can you have a control with climate change. How can you even measure what's going on, given the very small window we have into the system.
The answer is you can't. You have to make a model and make assumptions.
If they can't predict how many hurricanes will happen next year, how can they say what the long term trend is.
edbarbarg 4 years ago
Long term trends, such was global warming, are actually much easier to predict than short term things like the weather. The reason for this lies within the study of mathematical chaos. But don't take my word for it, there is a lot of available reading on this topic, as it has been addressed already by many scientists.
art1vand3lay 4 years ago
Do you understand the theory of mathematical chaos (the butterfly effect)? Basically, it says that very little deltas can have enormous affects on the outcome, the opposite of what you are saying.
the butterfly effect is so called by the romantic notion that a butterfly flapping its wings can cause a tornado miles away and days later.
edbarbarg 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@art1vand3lay -- Ron Paul says end the EPA -- and pollution laws should be TOUGHER!
/watch?v=XsZ6-2BdpIQ
Learn about United Nations Agenda 21 for the true agenda behind the carbon tax -- global government.
vechorik 3 months ago
Also, most climate modelers agree that while the models are not entirely accurate, that more accurate models would not give largely different results. If there was a serious problem with climate modeling, there would not be thousands of modelers out there employed by the nation's best universities and science programs.
art1vand3lay 4 years ago
Welcome to humanity's death knell. The moderator is a hero.
kbuzznet 4 years ago
Glad to see Fred put her in her place. What he did has nothing to do with Global Warming, but more about reacting in a powerful way to a Democrat talking point.
edbarbarg 4 years ago
If the global climate is a Democratic talking point the Republican is even further out of the mainstream than I thought.
freakyfatdog 4 years ago
It is a yes or no question. This whole "I won't raise my hands, I need 30 seconds" is bs.
ilovebball 4 years ago
goddamn she is such a bitch
thinkfloyd1973 4 years ago
what a bitch she is
geomike99 4 years ago
Mitt Romney's response was excellent.
BigDumbNerd 4 years ago
The causes, consequences, and proposed remedies for Global Warming transcends political parties. That John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney (and to a lesser extent, Alan Keyes) have gone on record as saying that human-contributed Global Warming is real and that there should be something done about it shows this to be a fact.
The overwhelming theme of this debate (and of this entire campaign) is the Republican contenders' unilateral rush away from the "legacy" of the Bush Administration.
shockmagog 4 years ago
The debate facilitator of this gathering was terrible.
Djronan1 4 years ago 7
Fred Thompson's petulant obstructionism aside, it's worth noting that All Four Republican Frontrunners (and no one else) raised their hands before they heard what Fred said. (Even though Romney and Huckabee only raised them halfway, and Romney brought his hand down as quickly as possible.)
What does that say about the candidates, do you think? Could there be a correlation?
P.S. I was surprised that Ron Paul did not raise his hand. Shame. I had always kind of liked him.
inertia720 4 years ago
A rather odd approach to a debate, asking for a show of hands and then not wanting to hear any explanation from the candidates. What was the moderator afraid of? Does she not understand that a debate is a discussion/argument of a subject?
zrz9 4 years ago 2
Worst debate in American history. CNN has now earned the right to be the most "laughable" news organization on TV. Where did they find this moderator? Why doesn't CNN treat the Democratic hopefuls this way?
massivbeast 4 years ago 2
Did I miss something or was this sponsored by someone other than CNN?
s7rugg1e 4 years ago
This was a debate hosted by the Des Moines Register shown on Iowa PBS and carried by all the major news networks. This footage is from MSNBC.
petulantrumble 4 years ago
Alan Keyes sounds like a moron
paigia 4 years ago
As soon as we stop driving around in gas operated automobiles, I'll believe the US is actually serious about global warming.
What happened to the electric car?
starkums 4 years ago
"i won't simply raise my hand, because i want a fair opportunity to spin"
adamlolol 4 years ago
I heard "they" are now using the term Global Climate Change instead of Global warming because the temps have COOLED for three years!
haha lol what a bunch of dummies
hm a few still call it Global warming
(ps we just had a major ice storm here in Missouri. Not too warm yet. :::rolling eyes:::)
It's just another scare tactic to take away more of our inalienable god-given rights.
WizarDave2007 4 years ago 2
you are the guy who waits until the penguins burn.
schwirzl 4 years ago
All that global warming on Pluto is frmo carbon dioxide too I guess.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago 2
"All that global warming on Pluto is frmo carbon dioxide too I guess."
Convoluted logic. Just because there is global warming on Pluto doesn't mean that humans are not causing it on earth.
Cornplanter 4 years ago
Wrong. Why is global warming happening on Pluto and Mars? The sun has a cycle of low/high output and it is being completely ignored by the algorians because it would take humanity out of climate change. Humans MAY BE changing the globe, but is that a bad thing even? Are we preventing a new ice age? There is no need for fatalism.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago
"The sun has a cycle of low/high output"
That's even more reason to limit our green house gas production. The increase in solar activity may be a contributor to global warming however there is not much we can do to change the sun. What we CAN do is decrease our carbon footprint and decrease the impact man has on our climate.
"is that a bad thing?"
I'll let you know when the ice in Antarctica melts and floods all our cities on the coast.
Cornplanter 4 years ago
But again, you are making an extremely hyperbolic statement from an unproven cause/effect. It is good to decrease CO2, no one is arguing that decreasing pollution is a GREAT THING! However, saying that we are going to melt Antarctica is irresponsible.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago
"It is good to decrease CO2, no one is arguing that decreasing pollution is a GREAT THING!"
Sure they are. You are. Remember your quote: "Humans MAY BE changing the globe, but is that a bad thing even?"
As far as man influencing the climate, that is hardly an "unproven cause/effect".
Cornplanter 4 years ago
Well, since 96% of all greenhouse gases are water vapor and thereby uncontrollable, what is there to say? To point man out as the destroyer of all and creator of nothing destroys his greatness.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago
"Well, since 96% of all greenhouse gases are water vapor and thereby uncontrollable, what is there to say?"
EXACTLY my point. Since there ARE green house gases you CANNOT control, you limit the ones you can: those caused by man.
I really can't see how the "greatness" of man is any way diminished by limiting the amount of fossil fuels we burn.
Cornplanter 4 years ago
Where did your 96% come from? It's really less than 66%, and as low as 33% when water vapor condenses into clouds, rain, and snow. CO2 contributes as much as 25% of the greenhouse effect and it is well within agreement with the physics of the greenhouse effect that the increased atmospheric concentration since the industrial revolution (280 ppm to the current 380 ppm) to attribute the observed temperature increase to this cause.
art1vand3lay 4 years ago
temperature went up before CO2 did... its a myth that CO2 caused temperature to rise... and thats not just me saying that, thats from the EPA...
sming01 2 years ago
Oh, my. I get that the moderator is trying to run a tight ship. This doesn't mean, though, that she should treat these presidential hopefuls so rudely. Truthfully, she's a mess.
studycourts 4 years ago 2
She is, and she will be mocked by republicans as the liberal she is for weeks to come. GO FRED!
s7rugg1e 4 years ago 2
Maybe you haven't been following race, but FRED IS DEAD. He's not even trying anymore. All he does is make grunting noises all the time.
GoDownFighting24 4 years ago 2
He beat everyone else in this debate, and they avoided asking him questions because he could knock down any other candidate and EVEN the moderator, which no other RINO has the balls to do.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago
Yeah, these debates are insanely biased against certain candidates. I think Fred got the least time out of anybody...barely edged out by Ron Paul. Seriously though, how do you think Fred's campaign is doing?
GoDownFighting24 4 years ago
You'll see when he gets 1st or 2nd. Ron Paul, however, will remain at the tail end. It's really hard to get Democrats to vote Republican.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago
Lucky for me and Ron Paul, you don't understand what's going on.
GoDownFighting24 4 years ago
Yes, I do. Ron Paul is a squeaky Texan fringe candidate who has no chance of winning. He has constantly trailed in the polls and is usually accompanied by trolling 'truther' types who think that every candidate other than him is the spawn of satan. Of course, the media encourages all the hype because they know he can't win and somewhat mimics another strange Texan fellah from '92 that instilled Clinton.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago 2
Thanks for proving my point.
GoDownFighting24 4 years ago 2
You're welcome, but please quit the cult before the kool-aide gets passed around after the first few primaries.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago 2
it's a shame about fred. who's your hoss now?
kihadat 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@s7rugg1e ROMNEY'S 2012 PLAN CUTS MEDICARE--Ron Paul’s plan cuts $1 trillion the first year & balances the budget in 3 years. The plan cuts spending by ending the costly foreign wars, and cuts foreign welfare, corporate welfare, and overgrown federal bureaucracy. These cuts are made so that those who are dependent on domestic spending programs such as Medicare aren’t endangered through a sudden change in benefits. Romney’s plan cuts Medicare, on which many elderly Americans rely.
vechorik 3 months ago