Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: President 'has four years to save Earth' US must take the lead to avert eco-disaster

  1. #11
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Seen
    01-10-12 @ 05:22 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    351

    Re: President 'has four years to save Earth' US must take the lead to avert eco-disas

    I wonder if they've accounted for the economic collapse in their dooms day projection. Falling demand may impact their models significantly. Especially if the economic crisis continues for years. Destroy the economy, save the planet. Bush, the greatest Enviro ever!

  2. #12
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:55 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: President 'has four years to save Earth' US must take the lead to avert eco-disas

    I stopped reading this comedy skit when these words appeared,"Only the US has the political muscle to lead the world and halt the rise." If there is one person in this forum that believes that then let that person rise and speak after all I have not heard a good joke since Henny Youngman died.
    It's nothing more than X's and O's.

  3. #13
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: President 'has four years to save Earth' US must take the lead to avert eco-disas

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    LOL... That's OK for majority of Libs. They're like a nice quilt... thick and soft.

    Soft on terrorism, terrorists, National Defense... and have a soft spot for socialism. This is just another quiver in their socialist agenda.

    Thick... as a brick.

    How else can you embrace an absolute rookie who's idea of for a campaign is "Change and Hope"... without clarification of what both mean? You've got to be both soft and thick.
    The same way you can embrace a candidate who ran on the campaign of "Look how much like a normal person I am" or "The Maverick", I mean... seriously? "The Straight-Talk Express"?

    "Soft on terrorism" doesn't make sense. You apparently do not understand what "terrorism" is. You use the term "socialism" to see the Maoist, or Leninist results, but what you never understand is that it's not a straight line (the political spectrum) it is more of a circle. The equivalent of a socialist on the right-side (possible fundamentalist, depending on how poorly you are actually using the spectrum) is the same distance away from centrist, and the same away from totalitarian. The difference between a Communist (not the Marx sense of Communism, but maoism, etc.) and a Fascism is two guns and one hydrogen bomb.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  4. #14
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: President 'has four years to save Earth' US must take the lead to avert eco-disas

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    A stupid public is one that let's itself be run off a cliff chasing after a phantom.
    Well said, but I don't think an environmentalist is running a nation off of it's plateau. To deny the effects of pollution on the environment is ridiculous.

    Depends on what they are doing. Reagan pushed for and defeated the USSR in part, because he forced them to respond to America, to the specter of America having military superiority. They collapsed because they chased their fears. Much as we suffered from 76-80 under Carter, a President with little to his name.
    Don't give Reagan credit for that. The USSR was falling before Reagan was in office. You need to do some clarification on this. 1) Whose "they". 2) What do you mean by chased? Chased, trying to hunt down and destroy, or chased as in following right behind i.e. in pursuit.


    Science requires honesty, James Hansen is not an honest scientist. He's a career opportunist, he lied about being muffled by the Bush Administration, and the following article if you read spells out quite nicely Hansen and the problem with people like him.
    The New Atlantis Censoring Scientists?
    I've never read that article. Thanks.
    Most legit occupations require honesty. However, a problem is that very rarely, in personal or professional life, is a person actually honest-- not trying to call anyone a liar, just saying that some feel it is best to not cause harm with a white-lie, then be truthful and decimate someone.

    Hansen has an agenda, and "the sky is falling" ranting of folks like him are dangerous. He's pushing more then science, he's pushing a personal and political agenda with serious consequences for us all.
    Without he has an agenda, and he is tainting the well--those whom are passionate about their duty to their environment. I do not think the best thing to do is to cast aside every scientist with an unfortunate reputation. Regardless of how honest they are, they may have an underlying point. Even Hitler, as disgusting as his beliefs were, had a point that needed attention drawn to it.



    Passion and Crazy are two sides of the same coin, and a deeply philosophical discussion to undertake. Passion can be carried too far, and crazy can be a lame excuse of others to ignore anothers passion.
    I agree wholeheartedly. I think passion is essential to every field of study and work. The next time I have a pizza and there is no passion in it, I am going to throw up-- it is extremely easy to tell with a dough tosser doesn't give a sh!t or the baker has no feeling in it, or the preparation chef has no attention to detail-- no love for the ingredients. It is absolutely tragic.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •