When will neocons admit they are wrong about climate change science and change their consumer behavior?

Answer 1

Global warming IS a natural cyclical process that continues over centuries. The issue is not that people are 'wrong' about climate change; the issue is that since our Industrial Revolution began 150 years ago, mankind has contributed to the escalation of the cycle, allowing humans, plants and animals insufficient time to adapt to climate changes.
Global warming IS a 'real' threat to our world. But it's not some kind of political football that can used to cast blame or create more hostility among political opponents.
"Neocons" aren't the only ones who disregard the problems we face because of global warming. Al Gore is not the only one who might not "practice what he preaches" in some people's eyes. We are all to blame because of our decadent, gluttonous life styles.
Arrogance, avarice, selfishness, and hubris has set in and few of us are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to create the necessary changes that will save our Earth.
* How many of us will give up our Hummers or gas-guzzling SUVs and drive small, compact, fuel-efficient automobiles?
* How many of us will start walking to work (or school, or to the store), or at least riding mopeds or bicycles?
* How many of us are willing to start carpooling or using mass transportation instead of driving a six-passenger vehicle with only one person in it?
* How many of us diligently try to Reuse, REduce, and REcycle virtually everything instead of letting it be picked up and tossed into a landfill?
* How many of us have stopped using chemicals on our lush green lawns?
* How many of us eat only organic foods that are grown without the use of pesticides and other chemicals?
* How many of us really understand - or care - about the fact that rain forests are being destroyed all over the world so that we can enjoy a cheap Big Mac?
* How many of us recognize that we've 'overfished' the world's oceans and there is very little sustainable sea life left in our waters?
* How many of worry about luxury developments being built on the shores of lakes and oceans around the world, wiping out the valuable mangrove forests?
* How many of us realize that every human, plant, insect, and animal on this Earth is dependent on one another for survival?
* How many of us give a damn about the plight of the polar bears, rare exotic frogs in the Amazon, remote Eskimo tribes, sea otters, or wild flowers growing in lush green lands that might all soon be gone just because WE have to drive luxury cars, live in fancy homes, fly across the country, or squander Earth's precious natural resources at alarming rates?
* How many of us will be able to explain to our beautiful little great-grandchildren that it was our greed, gluttony, wastefulness, and selfishness that caused them to wear gas masks in order to breathe fresh air; how will we tell them that we simply cared about our own creature comforts more than we cared whether they had enough clean water to drink?
* How many of us will be surprised when coasts of all major oceans begin to disappear, weather patterns change dramatically, severe storms hit major metropolitan areas of major countries, and parts of Florida and Bangladesh are suddenly drowned?
* How many of us will be left on this planet in fifty years if we don't join together - politically, emotionally, spiritually and physically - to solve this serious threat to our very existence?? -RKO- 10/13/07

Answer 2

When you can answer these questions:

1 - What percentage of current climate change is attributable to man-made factors, and what percentage is attributable to random variation of the sun?

2 - Why is warming occurring on Mars?

3 - Why will the coders of global climate models not release their computer code?

4 - How are temperatures pre-1700 validated?

5 - Why do global climate models predict future warming, even when *RANDOM* values are input for past temperature?

If you can answer those simple...scientific...questions, then your theory of man as a primary cause of climate change will have stood up to scrutiny. That, after all, is science, right...reproducible results that stand up to scrutiny?

Answer 3

He seemed to think it was harmless enough to pay a little lip service to the AGW believers without actually saying anything. I remember that speech. It seems to be carefully worded so that the believers can say 'Bush is with us now' but he didn't say anything to indicate that CO2 was having a significant effect on the climate. A lot of the believers on this forum have said that 'Bush agrees with us now'. This entire global warming movement is going to run it's course sooner or later. People are just going to forget about it eventually and move onto something else. Calling proponents a bunch of brainwashed cult members is going to create animosity. Most politicians seem to be careful to avoid any unnecessary animosity.

Answer 4

When will libs and tree-huggers admit that climate change has been happening since GOD made the heavens and the earth. Our earth has been warming and cooling since the beginning of time and will continue to do so."Climate Change" is more about politics, its not about "saving" the earth,its more about bringing the USA down.Isn't it odd that Al Gore won't debate climate change with anyone,( but if I didn't have the facts on my side,I wouldn't debate either).

Answer 5

A lot of them haven't even came around to admitting that the Theory of Evolution is true. They live in their own little pathetic reality. Throwing away the evidence when it's not convenient for them. It will probably take them AT LEAST 30 years to acknowledge the truth about global warming.

Answer 6

Yes, at the same time people like gore and pelosis start flying commercial and driving electric cars....When the left decides to start practicing what they preach...Global warming is not a political fight it is a human fact needing everyones attention so walk , ride a bike and keep your current car and don't buy a new car until the car companies start producing low priced hybreds.....

Answer 7

We are just trying to follow the leader's example. Instead of taking a commercial flight with hundreds of others we fly solo in a private jet. Instead of buying or renting a Small home we have a 12 room mansion for 4 people. Instead of conserving electricity, water and gas, we use 10 times as much as the average consumer. And we try to follow the second leader, John Edwards who is building a 13,000 sq ft home for how many, 6 or 7? The average home has 1,100 sq ft for a family of four. That's 275 sq ft per person. Now 13,000 for 7 equals 1,875 sq ft per person. Who's over using here?

You commies need to understand that if you want to be a leader and have a cause then LEAD. We will follow your example. I just wish we all were as rich as these two to follow their example.

Answer 8

If not for climate change, then to stop financing the MidEast. Let's build more Nuclear Plants and make Oil a worthless muck that nobody wants.

Answer 9

They probably won't, don't get your hopes up. What I don't understand is even if they don't completely agree, why not err on the side of caution to support green technologies. I would rather have been wrong about global warming and clean up our act anyways seeing as responsible consumerism would benefit many aspects of our environment...clean rivers, clean land, clean ocean, healthy ecosystem at the very least...ummm...I don't really see a problem here.

And to speak conservative lingo...in order to stay ahead of the curve and profitable we should be exploring these avenues before other countries get the edge on technology. That is what has help America stay powerful and profitable---innovation!

Answer 10

When Al Gore REALLY goes green & stops profiting from the BS that is global warming. Ol' Al has 5 huge houses, a hot-rod, an old gas guzzling airplane & he gets off by stating he's going to plant a tree; what a prophylactic he is.