Bush says global warming might be "natural"

[JerrySeinfeld]

When asked what his plan was for global warming after a speech he said:

"Good. We -- first of all, there is -- the globe is warming. The fundamental debate: Is it manmade or natural."

Before all you Bush defenders fall all over yourselves to throw up articles from "scientists" about global warming, don't bother.

I just wanted to expose Bushs words to as many as possible.

So now you're saying someone with dyslexia shouldn't be President? How INSENSITIVE of you

As for global warming...

If you look back about 30 years you'll see that in the 1970's the majority of scientists studying the climate were convinced the earth was headed for the next ice age.

Now we're heating up?

Which is it, boys?

How can there simultaneously be more floods, more droughts, more storms & less storms etc.

Humankind has become so egotistical we actually think we have an effect on all of this. There may be some effect, but no moreso than, say a beaver who builds a dam and changes the ecosystem around him.

That is to say: it's not only humans that affect their surroundings and its not necessarily unnatural or bad.

I'm all for science and discovering whats going on - but not in favor of jumping to vast conclusions and signing off on hasty "Kyoto Protocols" which are political games aimed at making us feel better about something we don't even understand yet...

[KrustyKidd]

I'm all for science and discovering whats going on - but not in favor of jumping to vast conclusions and signing off on hasty "Kyoto Protocols" which are political games aimed at making us feel better about something we don't even understand yet...

Sounds like;

The fundamental debate: Is it manmade or natural.

is to you, an apt question.

[gerryhatrick]

So now you're saying someone with dyslexia shouldn't be President? How INSENSITIVE of you

Not saying anything about how he talks. It's the content.

As for global warming...

If you look back about 30 years you'll see that in the 1970's the majority of scientists studying the climate were convinced the earth was headed for the next ice age.

Now we're heating up?

Which is it, boys?

This is too funny. This is why I don't bother debating folks like yourself on global warming anymore.

You're like a person who has some unseasonably cold weather and jokes with everyone about where the heck is that global warming.

You went out and got a little bit of information that's useful to you and from that pretend there's still "debate" about global warming, and yet you're so ignorant you don't even know even the basic facts about global warming. Like how it's expected to affect the gulf streams, which would trigger another ice age.

It simultaneous certitude and ignorance ya'll have on the subject is stunning. And a little depressing.

I think many folks willfully take the position you and KK do because they're more concerned with their personal comforts (which they think will be affected by government action on greenhouse gasses) than they are with the health of the world. It's a selfishness that permeates the Conservative right.

[geoffrey]

Our kids, if nothing is done now, will be fighting for their lives, not lifestyles. Change has to be done soon, planning now. And, the people that stand in the way ie: backward cultures and despotic dictators have to go.

That was said 40 years ago. And will be said 40 years from now.

It's fearmongering to push an agenda.

[sharkman]

Our kids, if nothing is done now, will be fighting for their lives, not lifestyles. Change has to be done soon, planning now. And, the people that stand in the way ie: backward cultures and despotic dictators have to go.

That was said 40 years ago. And will be said 40 years from now.

It's fearmongering to push an agenda.

Fearmongering? What was the first clue, the shrillness or the spittle at the corners of the mouth?

[Leafless]

If anybody is aware and knows anything about good old water vapour as a predominant geenhouse gas and is created naturally and intensifies with natural population growth. But also is produced greatly by manmade devices you should understand George W. Bush's statement is correct.

The only problem 'determined or not' is we really cant do much about either.

[gerryhatrick]

If anybody is aware and knows anything about good old water vapour as a predominant geenhouse gas and is created naturally and intensifies with natural population growth. But also is produced greatly by manmade devices you should understand George W. Bush's statement is correct.

The only problem 'determined or not' is we really cant do much about either.

Huh?

[KrustyKidd]

That was said 40 years ago. And will be said 40 years from now.

In 1965 most of the planet didn't even have a radio much less a car. Now, the population doubles every thirty or so years and the area to support the growing poulation grows smaller. Along with this, people are becoming more affluent in number increasing the consumption of the resources so, if anybody tells me that this is a sound strategy with no danger involved for the future, I would strongly disagree with them.

I know you are probably sick of this particular example but will put it forth in a differeent light. Easter Island when it first became inhabiter circa 700 ad was covered in forest, much like any other tropical paradise. And then, the depletion of the resources began. As there was no written record, nobody really knew that the island was slowely dying as they had no memory of a land full of trees so, after the resources became depleted after many generations, there would have been no person to cut down the last tree and say "gee, I just cut down the last tree' In any case, the death throes we know as the population split into two segments and vied for control of what was left. In the end, they were controlling herds of chickens of all things. Later, anarchy occured as without a reason or reward, the chiefs had no control and the people had no reason to be controlled. Canabilism, disease, war, famine. A very good example of what happens when resources get consumed without being replaced. It happened in other areas as well, even to the Norse in Greeland.

No, in fact, there would have been smaller and smaller trees and saplings and then finally, only grass with no person knowing that once, it was all there.

The reason I explain that is that we begin to deal with a problem by shifting things around rather than recognize that it is an inevitability if we continue on a certain course. For esample, things are fine her in Canada so what's the problem? Well, we do trade, we are also part of a shrinking world. If that world begins to collapse upon itself then there would have to be some sort of effect on us in the futurre right? Is a world full of starvation and miliarism where starving people with access to all sorts of weapons and having nothing to lose conductive to our survival? I don't think so . I also don't think that trying to feed a Canadian nation without trade with other countries is an option either, although it may have to be if the rest of the world is in terminal collapse.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear KrustyKidd,

I also don't think that trying to feed a Canadian nation without trade with other countries is an option either,

Isolationism in extremus, but plausible. Canada is one of the few countries in the world that actually could do it, though.

[KrustyKidd]

Isolationism in extremus, but plausible. Canada is one of the few countries in the world that actually could do it, though.

Not even worth discussion Lonious. First, you have to be able to protect the country from anybody that wanted something you had and, with the rest of the world wanting to be here, we would be spending an extraordinary amount of our effeort on protecting ourselves. Crops are seasonal for the most part and, even if you managed to make it work, you would be living in a control based society like nothing you could imagine. It would be survival period.