Actually it started before Al Gore. It was just that he was one of the first leftists who saw a way to personally profit from the con and at the expense of taxpayers and all working class people. A leftist dream come true.
Why yes; yes I do . . . that is if you consider a link to his own blog on the subject to be authoritative enough: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/145456082991/my-endorsement-for-president-of-the-united-states "So I’ve decided to endorse Hillary Clinton for President, for my personal safety. Trump supporters don’t have any bad feelings about patriotic Americans such as myself, so I’ll be safe from that crowd. But Clinton supporters have convinced me – and here I am being 100% serious – that my safety is at risk if I am seen as supportive of Trump. So I’m taking the safe way out and endorsing Hillary Clinton for president." -- Adams
Holy shyt is he a weird dude. He is either deranged or simply engaging in what he thinks is humor. A RACE WAR? Personal safety? The guy is batshyt crazy
Translation: He IS NOT a race-agitating, nation-hating leftist who buys unthinkingly into the Climate Change theory as promoted by bought and paid for scientists whose fiscal and career best interests reside in promoting Climate Change theories as . . . settled science.
He basically said that a Clinton victory would trigger a race war and then endorsed her. The guy is either kidding or he's ****ing crazy. Either way no one should be looking to him for his opinion in politics
No body of study has been more wrong and more often as science. Today's science facts are tommorrow's science myths. Even they predict that if we were to throw the entire wealth of the planet into cooling, we might be able to reduce the climate by 2 tenths of 1 degree. The Algorites are getting desperate to collect 15 trillion dollars before we enter a cooling cycle science predicts will happen in 3 years. Science is the new religion and are worshipped like they're infallible. Yet the high priests of the Algorites continue to increase their carbon foot print while demanding money and sacrifice from everyone else.
I'll allow our good friend highntight to answer their fellow leftist's posts: I would further the conversation by asking Bowerbird the following questions: How much money does the oil industry make on each gallon of gas to comprise these 'obscene profits' about which he's clucking? And how much does the Government make on each gallon of gas? Tell us all about what is obscene, Bowerbird.
I would quibble with the characterization in your first sentence, Sam. It isn't "science" which is proven wrong...ever. It's the political hacks and errant souls who study as scientists. It is, after all, true any scientific discovery proven wrong had to have been proven so utilizing science as the means to correction.
I really enjoy being able to use the words of a leftist against another leftist. Thanks for the opportunity.
There are two ways to fix that. 1. Become correct. 2. Have the AGW movement altered to now support global cooling, and the need to burn more fossil fuels in order to counter the effects. The latter is more truthful than the AGW movement itself to date. PS: opposition to the scam of AGW goes far beyond the GOP. What percentage of Trump voters, for instance, do you even think are a member?
Paid? This is pro bono, shawty. I probably could be, however, as my efforts are actually worth something. Yours, on the other hand...well: they got what they paid for.
I find it hilarious that you think that there are only 1077 climate scientists on the entire planet! You can't make this stuff up!
Exactly. We have 2 courses of action - listen to scientists, increase use of solar, wind, geothermal energy - fund Fusion research - enhance efficiency, and reduce the use of fossil fuels. If we do that, and the scientists are wrong, what is the down side? NOTHING. We'd have cleaner air to breathe, wouldn't have to go to war for oil, and would be better off. If we do nothing, and the scientists are right, we are screwed. Do you feel lucky, punk? Well, do ya?
That is already being done but often with taxpayer money which does not need to happen. Trying to reduce CO2 is a fools errand if the rest of the world keeps building coal power plants so the money is better spent preparing the coastal communities for rising sea level which has been rising since the end of the Little Ice Age long before CO2 was considered a problem and CO2 itself is helping greening the earth so will help with rising populations. The 2.5 million year ice age has reduced CO2 levels to near starvation levels for plants.
