Particular after the latest legislative atrocity passed the house with the help of eight RINOS. Andrea Harris:
…my, what a bunch of glass-half-empty gloomy gusses you global warmy climate changenists are. Human ingenuity managed to survive the last great Ice Age, and that was when we were a small, fragile population that used bones and rocks as tools. And in fact, we increased and civilization was formed as the climate started warming — yes, floods and all — and the glaciers receded, leaving more land to learn to grow stuff in. You’re saying the human race is now too weak and stupid to survive a possible moderate increase in global temperature? (Which actually seems to be decreasing, but never mind.) Maybe we should start a new slogan: “Surviving Climate Change: So Complicated, Only A Caveman Could Do It.”
I think we’d do better with cave men running Congress. Maybe the White House, too.
Not to mention the press.
Agreed. It all starts with letting the boobs run our educational system. Real adults with the proper foundation would never, ever let this happen to our country. But even then, are there any adults in the media? Or are they just too busy stroking each other?
I believe I see a new bumper sticker.
When all this comes to pass and the American public finally does awaken from whatever stupor they are currently in there are going to be some mighty ticked off people. Of course, they’ll scapegoat it on some group or another rather than looking in the mirror.
I sincerely hope we have the collective strength and fortitude to unroll this stuff when it is revealed for the sham that it is.
“Surviving Climate Change: So Complicated, Only A Caveman Could Do It.”
That needs to be on a T-shirt.
I sincerely hope we have the collective strength and fortitude to unroll this stuff when it is revealed for the sham that it is.
If they are passing 1300 page laws without being read or debated, couldn’t they essentially make themselves emperor for life or it’s equivalent? Perhaps not in one bite, but they are taking control of large chunks of our economy with each bite.
So our democracy continues it’s devolution into moronacy. The most far reaching legislation since the Social Security program, and the Democrats bum rush the bill through the House of Representatives? The majority of the representatives voting for passage of a 1,500 page bill none of them has even read? Even if I were a full 100% supporter of the underlying ideas of the legislation, I wouldn’t want such an abuse of the legislative process.
But the people voted those clowns into power, so the people get the government they deserve. God help us all!
Brad,
the problem is that they not only abuse the process this way, they don’t see it as abuse and then they crow about what a great thing they’ve done afterward.
The mindless simps.
My suggestion? Sharpen the guillotines.
I used to think that the country could hold together for a few more generations, but sadly, I no longer believe that’s the case. It’s very painful to believe that my children will see the United States fall apart.
The passage of such a far-reaching bill with essentially no debate, with the bill unread by any of the legislators, is beyond outrageous. Our political system is hopelessly broken, and, as is the case with the public schools, so utterly damaged that I really do not believe repair is even possible.
“That needs to be on a T-shirt.”
I want a cut of the profits!
You’re saying the human race is now too weak and stupid to survive a possible moderate increase in global temperature?
No one is arguing that climate change will eliminate the human race. By Andrea’s standard, it would be fine if 99% of all humans were wiped out, as long as “human ingenuity” survived (amidst the billions of corpses).
I want a cut of the profits!
You know the URL for Cafe Press, Andrea.
So how many people are you expecting to die off from global warming? 99% sounds like we’re starting to get into some pretty serious territory.
Well, Karl, Jim does seem to think that the ice caps are going to melt just like that, so “99% of humanity” dying fits in with his disaster-porn attitude.
Re the t-shirt: the more I think about that, the more I like it. I might not use Cafepress, though — there are some other websites where you can sell t-shirts and stuff, like zazzle.com I might check out. The only thing I wonder is, can Geico sue me for using their slogan? That would be funny, as they’re my car insurance company. Okay, maybe “funny” is the wrong word.
Hey, I’m thinking of a neat cartoon to go with the slogan. There’ll be a stereotypical beetle-browed caveman holding a club with a caption saying something like “10,000 BC: survived the Ice Age with stone tools.” And then next to him a stereotypical basement-dwelling internet troll at his computer, with maybe little arrows pointing to things like his a/c unit running full blast, his obese belly, his big bag of Cheetos and 7-Eleven Big Gulp soda, the Nikes on his feeble little feet, and above his head a balloon with a despairing statement: “OMG Global Warming the human race is doomed WTFBBQ!” I wish I’d kept up with my drawing…
Won’t someone think of the mammoths?
Jim has become Dr. Evil running away from the one kph steam roller. This planet has apparently gone through a cycle of ice ages and warm periods innumerable times. I live in Phoenix where it stays above 100 degrees for six months out of the year going above 120 many times (and midnight can have 100 degree temperatures.) Pretend that water vapor doesn’t mediate our temperature and I think we will continue to be fine.
All our coasts will flood and this is where 99% of the population will die??? You mean like the 99% that died during Katrina? Oh, they didn’t? I’ve decided to go back to farting Jim. Try to be a bit more amusing in your moronic comments. Let me know if the steam roller gets ya… so we can find our you’re actually the cartoon character from who framed Roger Rabbit?
Congress: Are you smarter than a cave man?
I’m not the one saying that 99% will die; Andrea is the one saying that having 99% die (i.e. anything short of extinction) would represent success.
Well, Karl, Jim does seem to think that the ice caps are going to melt just like that
No, I don’t think that, and haven’t written anything like that.
What I wrote, and I don’t think it’s controversial, is that the last time Earth had 500ppm atmospheric CO2, the planet was so warm that there was no surface ice.
Jim has become Dr. Evil running away from the one kph steam roller.
That’s an interesting analogy. The climate change steamroller is moving slowly by human standards, but it has enormous momentum, and it is accelerating. Knowing how much energy it will take to slow it down, how fast do you want to let it get moving?
No, climate change is not accelerating.
The so-called global warming abated from the mid-1940s to the mid-1970s, enough so that the eco-doomsters were all in a tizzy about the next ice age. The so-called global warming has also been in abeyance for the past decade, not so you’d notice from all the hysteria.
If you’re looking for rapid climate change, take a look at what happened in the 1200s, when the Little Ice Age (from which we’re still emerging – best estimates put us below the average that prevailed during the Medieval Warm Period) hit.
Anthropogenic global warming is a myth; not one of the computer models used to undergird it can even – using historical data – approximate our current climatic conditions, yet these utterly inaccurate fantasies are trotted out daily to ‘prove’ the thesis of the hysterics.
Phlogiston theory had better grounding in fact than climate change theory.
Jim says: ” The climate change steamroller is moving slowly by human standards, but it has enormous momentum, and it is accelerating.”
Really? Actually temperatures are declining:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=567880
Actually temperatures are declining
Oh, dear. An inconvenient truth.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I said. “The English language: so complicated only an internet troll can tell you what you really meant.”
Once again Jim claims his title as most value-subtracting TTM commenter.
That’s an interesting analogy. To which you amazingly miss the point. The comedy/tragedy being that you want to take action for an unknown result; when the known result of that action is economically destructive.
Andrea, you wrote:
You’re saying the human race is now too weak and stupid to survive a possible moderate increase in global temperature?
In fact, no one is saying that, but that’s the argument you chose to rebut. Your position is that we don’t need things like W-M, because in fact we are smart enough to avoid going extinct in a warmer world. We know that cavemen survived the last ice age, but we have no idea what the mortality rate was, just that breeding populations continued to exist. Is that good enough? If not, then what is good enough? Losing 90%? 10% 1%?
I suspect that by “survive” she meant lose none at all.
I suspect that by “survive” she meant lose none at all.
And you think there were no casualties of the last ice age? Really?
I was referring to her notion of surviving global warming. Of course there were casualties of the last glacial advance (we’re still in an ice age, geologically speaking). They had poor technology, and were dirt poor.
And if people like Jim had their way, more of us would be poor — from paying taxes and higher prices all to finance the religious hysteria of the Climate Changenists — and thus less able to ride out any possible weather-change-caused disasters.
Jim’s disproportionate reaction (“you’re against paying for our latest magical incantation to stop global warming that might happen, therefore you want people to die!”) is typical of the modern liberal, who has no idea how the real world works and are thus haunted by the most irrational fears. No wonder so many liberals end up on a psychiatrist’s couch.
Jim’s disproportionate reaction (”you’re against paying for our latest magical incantation to stop global warming that might happen, therefore you want people to die!”) is typical of the modern liberal
When, exactly, did I say anyone wanted people to die?
When, exactly, did I say anyone wanted people to die?
When, exactly, did you become incapable of comprehending written English?
Andrea is characterizing my reaction as accusing her of wanting people to die. I’m just curious where she’s getting that.
Andrea is characterizing my reaction as accusing her of wanting people to die.
So now you’re changing your story? You’re admitting that you didn’t know how to read?
So now you’re changing your story?
No. I said that Andrea’s standard for success, non-extinction, was setting the bar too far too low. That isn’t remotely the same as saying she wants people to die.
Hmm. Now my “standard for success” for the human race is “non-extinction,” when I could have sworn I expressed optimism in human intelligence and ingenuity based on the fact that our ancestors with their primitive stone tools were able to overcome much worse adversity than we modern humans face (and that therefore it is ridiculous for succumb to hysteria and magical thinking — “more taxes will protect us from climate change!” — because of what are merely normal weather fluctuations). I think I know what Jim’s problem is: his Trollsprach-English dictionary has some typos. Maybe instead of waiting for President Hopey Changemas to send you your own personal ark you should invest in a new dictionary.
Our cavemen ancestors “overcame” climate change in the sense that they did not go extinct; we do not know what fraction of them were wiped out. Our middle ages ancestors in Europe “overcame” the plague in the sense that only a third of them died.
Expressing “optimism” that we can do better than our ancestors did is not saying very much.
It’s better than expressing complete despair as you do. You must be fun at parties. “Aren’t we having a great time?” “No, we are merely those who have been lucky enough not to be killed in traffic or by a random heart attack before we got here. find no reason to celebrate such a random existence.”
By the way, if the human condition is so hopeless that the best we can hope for is for some of us “not to die” (which is the oddest way of describing “surviving” and “thriving” that I’ve ever seen) then how can you believe that anything the tax-and-spend-create-fake-green-jobs crowd will do any good? Because they’re only human, just like those cavemen and medieval people. Even Obama is human! No, really, he’s not a god, despite what they say on tv.
Oops, something ate the “I” that was supposed to be in front of “find no reason to celebrate such a random existence.” I blame climate change! The “I” must have burst into flames due to a temperature increase of 2 degrees Fahrenheit on the internet.
I don’t think the human condition is hopeless, in part because the scientific, economic and political developments that gave us our high level of fossil fuel use also gave us powerful national governments and international bodies that can attempt to deal with planetary-scale problems like climate change.
Human beings stayed all right during the global warming at the end of the Ice Ages …. That’s because they had dinosaurs to eat.
And their cars were powered by feet, which kept the temperature from getting too high!
powerful national governments and international bodies that can attempt to deal with planetary-scale problems like climate change.
Which do I trust less, Jim or the gods he worships… that’s a tough one.
I don’t think the human condition is hopeless, in part because the scientific, economic and political developments that gave us our high level of fossil fuel use also gave us powerful national governments and international bodies that can attempt to deal with planetary-scale problems like climate change.
Sure, Jim. They could attempt to deal with planetary-scale problems. But what’s in it for them? Getting reelected? They just need to appear to be trying. Getting power? They get far more power from never solving the problem. My long term complaint here is that you have demonstrated no inkling that you understand the conflicts of interest borne by the parties you put your hopes on. My take is that ignored conflicts of interest will always trump ideology and feelgood belief systems.