Published on December 15, 2008 By Island Dog In Politics

When I read this piece from the AP, I didn’t know whether it was a real story or a propaganda piece from Al Gore.

“WASHINGTON -- When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Now it is a ticking time bomb that President-elect Barack Obama can't avoid.

Since Clinton's inauguration, summer Arctic sea ice has lost the equivalent of Alaska, California and Texas. The 10 hottest years on record have occurred since Clinton's second inauguration. Global warming is accelerating. Time is close to running out, and Obama knows it.”

Is there anything left in journalism?  Does anybody wonder why newspapers and other media outlets are going out of business?


Comments (Page 5)
5 PagesFirst 3 4 5 
on Jan 05, 2009

Doc, beans have been around for a LONG time!

Ok, but the mammoths were doing the farting!

on Jan 05, 2009

Right, so everyone else should suffer because you decided to buy a house miles away from your job without any decent public transport links, and then decided to buy a polluting vehicle. I mean it couldn't possibly be your own fault for forcing yourself into that method of transportation now, could it?

When I'm looking for a house, the distance of it to my work is a significant factor. If I go for one further away it's cheaper, but it also limits my transport options. So if I do go for one that's further away, and benefit from getting a nicer house for the price I pay, I deserve to then lose out if cars are taxed appropriately for the damage they cause. In some ways it's the same as if I didn't purchase insurance for my home and it got burgled - I didn't pay insurance, meaning all the time I wasn't burgled I benefited by having more money than the person who did. Then I get burgled, and I end up worse off. Would you support a nice big cash handout to the burgled-non-insured person? I mean it's really screwed up that persons life to lose all their possessions and not have any money to replace them with.

Try living in a rural area.  It is very difficult where I live to find reasonable housing near my job, and even so I work at a job where most public transportation isn't allowed on site due to security reasons.  Sure I could get a different job, but jobs in my field are few and far between around here.  Yes some of these were definitely my choices but why should I be forced to live in an urban environment just to satisfy the global warming alarmists?

on Jan 05, 2009

but why should I be forced to live in an urban environment just to satisfy the global warming alarmists?

It will not be should - it will be mandatory.  Camp houses will be back, and it will not be only because of the great leap forward from Chairman Obama.

on Jan 06, 2009

EL-DUDERINO

Right, so everyone else should suffer because you decided to buy a house miles away from your job without any decent public transport links, and then decided to buy a polluting vehicle. I mean it couldn't possibly be your own fault for forcing yourself into that method of transportation now, could it?

When I'm looking for a house, the distance of it to my work is a significant factor. If I go for one further away it's cheaper, but it also limits my transport options. So if I do go for one that's further away, and benefit from getting a nicer house for the price I pay, I deserve to then lose out if cars are taxed appropriately for the damage they cause. In some ways it's the same as if I didn't purchase insurance for my home and it got burgled - I didn't pay insurance, meaning all the time I wasn't burgled I benefited by having more money than the person who did. Then I get burgled, and I end up worse off. Would you support a nice big cash handout to the burgled-non-insured person? I mean it's really screwed up that persons life to lose all their possessions and not have any money to replace them with.
Try living in a rural area.  It is very difficult where I live to find reasonable housing near my job, and even so I work at a job where most public transportation isn't allowed on site due to security reasons.  Sure I could get a different job, but jobs in my field are few and far between around here.  Yes some of these were definitely my choices but why should I be forced to live in an urban environment just to satisfy the global warming alarmists?

 

ahhh there people just dont understand .... they think people like me and you can just pack up and plan for 30 years down the road.

Did I plan on having disabled kids? I guess to people like this I should have seen it coming and preped for it.

I buy cars that I  can afford. When were the green cars introduced? I bought a used car last year because I could not afford a new car ( that and im working on my credit... ) but o wait I should have gotten the 40000 dollar car because well its the right thing to do

Bottom line is... unless its affordable these tree huggers need to sthu... Unless they are going to make up the cost of living in a bigger city for rent and such they need to shut up too.

on Jan 06, 2009

This taken from Fox: LINK

 

The expanding sun: If all else fails, the Earth will almost certainly come to an end in about 5 billion years when it falls into the expanding sun.

It's perfectly natural — stars like ours simply turn into red giants near the end of their lifespans, and their inner planets become toast.

Terrestrial inhabitants need not worry, since they'll be boiled off much earlier by the sheer heat of the growing star.

Some scenarios say we've got only a billion good years left on this planet — rather gloomy, since life in some form has been around for about 3.7 billion years and this means we're already close to the end.

Wow, and here I thought we were the problem?

5 PagesFirst 3 4 5