• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Three States Sue EPA Over Global Warming Ruling

Yeah, unless you try to breathe in Houston. :roll:

Where do you think all that **** spewing out of all those stacks goes since, you've noticed that it's not hanging around over Texas?



Yeah, so you say. Maybe Texas should secede and try to make it on her own, ehh? LOL! Oh, wait a minute, what would they do with all those teen pregnancies, DRUGS, illegal immigrants, etc. Puh-leeze. :doh


Texas Department of State Health Services - Family Planning Services



Texas ranks #12 for Violent Crime Rate National Ranking as well as
ranking 12th in rates of foreclosures. Neither is something to brag about.

So, please spare me the Holy Texas rant.
Way to derail the thread with your bull****. Nothing in your post has anything to do with the EPA or GW.
 
Why stop at batteries? Why not move to personal fusion power systems?

Think about it, if we all just had small, portable fusion generators, we could power our homes, our cars, our offices! Why we'd be green and energy independant!!!

It's called Low Energy Nuclear Reactions - LENR

Also Google 'Bloom Energy' if you want to get up to speed on how the world is changing faster than you know...
 
Way to derail the thread with your bull****. Nothing in your post has anything to do with the EPA or GW.

What are you, the thread monitor? I'd bet you were a Hall Monitor in elementary school with a spiffy shirt and note pad? What are you going to do, report me again? :roll: My understanding is that if you have a problem with a post, and you always do with all posts that debunk your position, then you should go run along, blow your whistle and tattle to a mod. But, until you are a mod ... well, talk to the hand...

"You" complaining about someone derailing a thread is like Sarah Palin complaining that somebody else is getting free clothes.
:doh
 
What are you, the thread monitor? I'd bet you were a Hall Monitor in elementary school with a spiffy shirt and note pad? What are you going to do, report me again? :roll: My understanding is that if you have a problem with a post, and you always do with all posts that debunk your position, then you should go run along, blow your whistle and tattle to a mod. But, until you are a mod ... well, talk to the hand...

"You" complaining about someone derailing a thread is like Sarah Palin complaining that somebody else is getting free clothes. :doh
Again you add zero, as usual.
 
Again you add zero, as usual.

Y'all must be competing for the same medal then.

---------------------------------

Anyways, Texas - Alabama and Virginia are suing the EPA over GW Rulings? What next? Will we have California, NY and Massachusetts file amicus briefs supporting the case for global warming? Why don't you guys call me when states where the majority of people do not believe in magical explanations of the origins of life do something of the sort?
 
Methane is a greenhouse gas, farts contain methane....
Is the EPA going to issue citations for farting?
 
Do the far-rights in this thread realize it was the Supreme Court that said EPA (under Bush) could take action on CO2 emissions?
.

But Bush.. but Bush... Man that is REALLY wearing THIN...

WTF, does the Supreme Court have to do with Bush... pray tell!

You do understand the whole three branches thing.... right?
 
But Bush.. but Bush... Man that is REALLY wearing THIN...

WTF, does the Supreme Court have to do with Bush... pray tell!

You do understand the whole three branches thing.... right?

Because while Bush was in office is when the Supreme Court ruled. So their ruling was a result of how the Bush Administration wanted the EPA to handle CO2 emissions.
 
But Bush.. but Bush... Man that is REALLY wearing THIN...

WTF, does the Supreme Court have to do with Bush... pray tell!

You do understand the whole three branches thing.... right?

Let me be clearer, the conservative-leaning court with 2 Bush appointees already made a relevant decision on this matter.

Although SCOTUS stop short of ordering the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, it ruled that it was certainly within the EPA's power to do so under the Clean Air Act.

Unfortunately the EPA under Bush was too inept and partisan to take appropriate action...

I mention Bush only to put this recent attempt by partisans funded by coal and gas interests in a timeline perspective.

The EPA has been empowered to regulate greenhouse gases -- with cap and trade stalled out, I would like to see them do so...
 
Do the far-rights in this thread realize it was the Supreme Court that said EPA (under Bush) could take action on CO2 emissions?

And note, that it took a radical, free-market-hating president (not Bush) to appoint radical EPA personnel who would take advantage of the misguided decision at the expense of the American people.
 
scientist's words are not evidence, no matter what his status is or how many books he wrote.

"EPA is proceeding with common sense measures that are helping to protect Americans from this threat while moving America into a leadership position in the 21st century green economy," the statement read. "Unfortunately, special interest and other defenders of the status quo are now turning to the courts in an attempt to stall progress. ...>>

The EPA should be censored or jailed for using scare tactics to advance their own dooms day agenda. There's no way to get world wide reliable data that proves GM or even establish an average F or C temperature to work with... Far too many variables, inconsistancies, and tolarerances to contend with.

ricksfolly

Wow.... I think that is the first thing I've seen you write that I agree with!

Now, if you could just get a handle on the quote function. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
And note, that it took a radical, free-market-hating president (not Bush) to appoint radical EPA personnel who would take advantage of the misguided decision at the expense of the American people.

See above comments Re: Bush EPA. You could substitute any most department under W. SEC... FDA...
 
1) Develop battery technology to the point where electric vehicles are feasible.

2) Nuclear power plants. Lots of them

But, at this point, none of that exists. Right?

Drill baby, drill!
 
Back
Top Bottom