New TV ad: Chris Coons' plan for Washington

http://www.chriscoons.com | Chris Coons' second television ad in his campaign for the U.S. Senate.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Chris Coons
• Christine O'Donnell
• Delaware
• Senate
• Congress
• Democrat
• Republican

[Darusdei]

@RichardMNixon it's a tax scam! and everyone is in it !

[RichardMNixon]

@3rdwise

This isn't about liberalism or conservatism, it's about science.

[3rdwise]

@RichardMNixon Just letting you know that a very liberal school in a very liberal city is even starting to not believe all the hype. I do believe global warming is happening to some degree, but there are far more important things in this age that we should be worrying about...

[RichardMNixon]

@3rdwise

I don't give a shit about Al Gore; he's a publicist, not an atmospheric physicist. What does atmospheric physics have to do with an art institute?

[3rdwise]

@RichardMNixon College Class "Art Institute Phila". My text book just said that if we do everything in our power to stop climate change it will only change .2 % difference than if we continue to live how we are... Al Gore was wrong he said Ca. would fall of USA in 2008, or 09..that never happened...He made $..thats it.

[3rdwise]

God Made us all. Luke Chap 1 : Verses 41-45. "The baby leaped in the womb for joy". That is proof we should all be PROLIFE!

[RichardMNixon]

In what way is IPCC political? Because you disagree with their conclusion or dislike the UN? It is not a political organization, it's a team of scientists that aggregate and review peer-reviewed scientific literature.

The NIPCC report was published by a conservative think-tank. How is it any less political than the IPCC?

Bottom-up? What are you talking about?

97% of climate scientists agree that humans are causing climate change. 97%. No scientific professional organizations disagree.

[moretap]

@RichardMNixon

Then why do they have a political group like the UN's IPCC and a political figure like Al Gore leading the front in pushing this "science"? It is clearly political. If it was really science -> policy, then our policy makers should consult scientific organizations such as the NIPCC (expressly nonpolitical). Science is not a top-down activity, it is bottom-up (similar to the TEA parties structure and ideal).

[RichardMNixon]

@moretap

You have it backwards. Science says the Earth's climate is changing as a result of human activity. This isn't political, this is the conclusion best supported by scientific evidence. Democrats and those in favor of environmental legislation are moving to enact policy based on this science. Science -> policy Republicans and the TEA party are politicizing the issue because they're on the payroll of industries that don't want climate legislation. Policy -> objection to science.

[moretap]

@RichardMNixon

The TEA party wants to limit government intrusions. This includes limiting how the government hinders scientific progress by politicizing the research and findings. If you don't want the government dictating how old it thinks the earth is for whatever political reason it wants, and you'd prefer to base the age of the earth on the scientific evidence then you must also favor limiting government intrusions into scientific research.