The EPA is the home of the communist party in America. Almost 100% of those employed by the EPA are so far left of center as to make Obama look conservative. This radical entity will continue to be a problem for a long time to come.
Either in spite of dire warnings -- or perhaps because of them -- Americans are now less likely to think humans are overheating the planet.
Only 36 percent in a recent poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press said they believe human activity is causing global warming. Even the number of people who think Earth is heating up at all has dropped 20 points in three years, from 77 percent to 57 percent.
It's possible the far left's hysterics and cataclysmic predictions have turned some people into skeptics.
In addition, as the Obama administration seeks draconian limits on commerce and industry to combat global warming, more people may be starting to question whether it's an overreaction -- as well as questioning the wisdom of sharply curbing U.S. economic activity unilaterally while our global competitors do not likewise hamstring themselves.
There is no international consensus on what to do, and some of the world's worst polluters have shown no signs of joining us in taking decisive action.
This newspaper's view is that the science of global warming may be unsettled -- and that pitchmen such as Al Gore have greatly overplayed their hand -- but that, regardless, the world needs to take serious actions to reduce pollution and accelerate humankind's leap to clean energy. Thus, if global warming is indeed influenced by humans, we've then taken the necessary steps to reverse it -- and even if it's not, the worst we've done is cleaned up the planet a bit.
It only makes sense to seek alternatives to fossil fuels, coal and other polluting forms of energy. If we do so with unprecedented urgency, then so much the better.
Where some of us draw the line, however, is arbitrarily -- and quite likely unnecessarily -- crippling our economy with "cap and trade," which would be a huge tax openly designed to reduce industry and commerce through limits on emissions. Cap and trade -- which has passed the House but not the Senate -- would also make the federal government an all-powerful referee over energy consumption.
Considering the Pew poll results, that prospect may frighten more people than global warming.
Comments
The EPA is the home of the communist party in America. Almost 100% of those employed by the EPA are so far left of center as to make Obama look conservative. This radical entity will continue to be a problem for a long time to come.
Pumping millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day CANNOT possibly do ANY environmental damage.Melting of the polar ice caps and glaciers could not have ANY effect on our climate.Destroying forrests CANNOT have ANY effect on our climate.We need to triple our burning of fossil fuel,slash and burn ALL forrests,dump more garbage into the seas,and start a world-wide effort to speed the melting of the polar caps so we can show that these peolpe concerned about the climate are NUTS.
We have polluted so much that the ice caps on Mars are melting as well..........or could it perhaps be for some other reason?
The left is always the first to claim that if you don't fall in line with the global anthropogenic global warming nuts, then you must not care about the planet. Wrong....we just don't believe in making up a crisis to get others to care as well. Why not use the truth?
WP, EPA = Communist Party. Did you get that from Beck or Limbaugh? I am sure it wasn't from a credible news source. If so please send the link. I think global warming is probably somewhere split down the middle between both extremes but an average American can't figure out the truth because it has become so political when you research it you just get two extremes.
Climate change and the veracity of Prezbhojangles, now those are two things that you can believe in................Right?
One thing I am sure of is these posters as well as the average American have no clue about global warming. They just deny it because their heroes Beck, Limbaugh, etc do or vice versa with Al Gore and company. I would love to see 55 F-100 given a microphone and 30 minutes to discuss global warming.
When people like Whippingpost and Tigger go to the extreme, as in this case, to malign agencies like the EPA, CDC and others, they give up what little credibility they had.
The world is moving head with The 350 Movement while many Americans have their heads buried in the sand. 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the upper limit that scientists (who use objective criteria rather than political calculations) say the Earth's atmosphere can carry without irreversible climate change. Today we have already reached 390 ppm of CO2. In other words we are already the beyond the tipping point and must reduce the ppm of CO2 in the air if we wish to mitigate the worse effects of a dramatic warming in Earth's climate over the long term. This is not a right vs left issue. This is a scientific, informed, responsible position verses an uneducated, misinformed, irresponsible position taken by those who deny man-made climate change. This could well be THE critical issue of our time because competition for scare resources (including water) will drive wars as billions of people are negatively impacted by the reality of climate change.
Try telling that to China and India.
lets see your scientist believes in man made disater in global warming while my scientist believes in of solar activity causing a slight warm up which also explains the polar caps on mars. you deem yours the expert i believe mine the expert. but my trump card is al gore a know idiot and the inventor of the internet. there has always been swing in global temperature and we have a responsibility to keep the enviroment clean. we can do this and still create jobs. we do not need wacko charges made by gore to dictate our economy while he flys around in a private jet and lives in a mansion and leacturing us on his money making scheme.
You can poll it to the cows come home, Ryan, but that won't change the facts. What an ignorant, small man you are. I'd hate to be accumulating the karma you've been, Ryan. We've all got to pay the piper one day.
One of the things in this editorial is the comment about being a good steward. The end of the world isn't nigh and global warming ended 11 years ago....according to the weather service. Polar bear populations are growing and the size and location of ice caps are returning to previous levels. It's like a cycle. It seems Gore is every bit the doofus he appears to be when ever he speaks.
You folks are beginning to sound like the people who were clinging to the Ark way back when. Begging Noah to let you on board. And WP if Gore and the scientists are doofus, then what does that make you, a Rhoades Scholar?
That Mars heating up deal can't be explained away. It's obviously the sun. We should have NASA send men to the sun to fix it. Yeah, yeah, I know it's really hot, but we could send them at night so they could release some chemicals on it to cool it down.
The sad thing is that the conservatives are increasingly making their appeal to high school dropouts who don't understand the issues with global warming, or anything else for that matter. There really isn't much debate among scientists about global warming. There is plenty of debate among the right wingers who substitute anger for knowledge.
Niko, to win a Rhodes scholarship, a person has to be charming, have a very good gpa in college and be vocally socialist in their social life during their school years. I never filled any of the criteria.
"Gore and the scientists" is such a silly comment, Niko. Am I to assume you bought into his "manmade global warming" theory? You know it's been shown to be wrong on many levels and the goofy "An Inconvenient Truth" is full of demonstrably incorrect claims. One doesn't have to be a Rhodes scholar to disagree with Gore, just be able and willing to read viable information.
Oh, I have no doubt who the high school dropouts vote for all their lives.
rhetor i quess if you keep repeating the lie that global warming is man made and about to kill us all off it will become true. there is division among the so called experts whether its man made or not. one cannot deny that there are global cycles in weather. until we destroy our economy we need an intelligent debate on its merits. follow the money and you will find al gore and a whole industry making millions on this theory. that should tell yu something. and if we sound angry you are wring its frustration with the left for open debate.
WP, first of all the socialist, marxist, and communist people were originally against their own country. They sound a lot like the people who are currently against the USA government today. So I am really wondering why the name calling when observers can really see who is actually exhibiting the behavior. Gore is a political speaker, not a scientist obviously. But there are emminent scientists out there who are proving that global warming is happening and getting worse. Forget the movies, they are entertaining, some truths some BS, but read the scientific journals. And it's not just us, but China & India too. And I'm sure that you were probably a "Charming Socialist" during your college years.
Anyone else find it ironic that Niko can't spell "Rhodes Scholar"?
Not ironic at all. :)
Niko, very funny. The national weather service spending the last 10 years proving that global warming ended in '98 just isn't good enough for you? I know there's a promotion on global warming in other countries, but that just proves there's a promotion. The "proof" currently being used for global warming is computer models. Not fact. And, while I'm always charming, I'm too much of an individualist to ever be a socialist.
And Niko, the communist, socialist, Marxist movement DOES hate the capitalist America and they ARE trying to destroy it. Why do you think Obama is so unpopular and getting more unpopular the more people learn about him?
I appreciate the that AC has finally come around to a more sensible opinion regarding the environment, but the final remarks of the editorial belie the earlier commentary. "Cap and trade" doesn't make sense to most people because it is some discombobulated term that has no meaning. It is actually an attempt to change a consumption behavior through taxation, much like we saw with cigarettes. In this case the attempt is to change energy behaviors. The issue of our economy makes the effort questionable at this time, and the promise of a new energy economy is too obscure and unclear in the minds of most Americans. However, whichever country leads the way on energy will lead the world for the next century. If we can make our country run on less energy it will be much like the savings of a four cyclinder engine over a HEMI. Moreover, if we can encourage industry to lead the way on their own we will develop a diversified energy economy that is less vulnerable to the inclinations of foreign interests. Cap and Trade sounds awful, but only if you don't know what it is and haven't looked at the energy problem the world is facing today and in the future.
Steve Wylie,are you suggesting retro technology? How many trains, transport planes and ships use 4 cylinder engines? The path to energy conservation isn't through big government, it's through competition. That's something the current administration is trying to kill.
Let's cut to the chase. There is a viable technology sitting on the shelf to solve our energy problems in a clean way. Nuclear power. We undertook an emergency program to reach the moon and it worked. We have the technology to run our vehicles off electricity and nuclear reactors are here now...just not enough of them. We need a national program to increase the number of reactors by a thousand or so and at the same time change vehicles to electrical power systems. This should be every bit as important as going to the moon was. No, much more important.
Like in my earlier post I really can't make up my mind about global warming. But, I do know that consuming less energy and finding alternative energy sources make since. That will benefit our economy and help with our national security. So I agree with the outcome that the global warming people present just not sure I fully understand the reason why. But the end results are positive for the country less energy consumption from more diverse and domestic resources.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
