Bush **U-TURN** on climate change wins few friends | Activism

Bush U-TURN on climate change wins few friends

Question:

South Dakota doesn’t count. But let’s not confuse two different things: the fact that we drench the earth in poison (herbacides) so that hardly anything but the crop intended can live, is completely separate from whether CLIMATE can affect the crop in question, more than the weeds, or more than at least one weed or a few.

I coulnd’t help but notice that you failed to even attepmt to address the question, as usual. The other point, that the article said "there exist weeds" not "All weeds" being hardier was in my other post. timeout

Your BS claim was that somehow increased CO2 would harm food production by helping the weeds. That’s BS no matter how you try to explain it away. William R. James

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "Now they have finally accepted that CO2 is causing global warming, they have absolutely no excuse for not rejoining the Kyoto process. Every day they continue to stall will now be held to be criminally negligent by future generations." The Kyoto scam wouldn’t do squat about the CO2 even if CO2 were causing global warming. All Kyoto is designed to to is transfer weath from US citizens and taxpayers to third world dictators and make "transfer [wealth] from US citizens and taxpayers to third world dictators You must be thinking of the military budget…" americans buy the right to produce from the distators of countries which don’t produce. Wiliam R. James A fool who’s never heard of weeds that are more hardy than the particular food crop one is planting. Must be living in a cave. Not unless you thing the 21st century is a cave. Ans not unless you think being educated is a cave. And not unless you think understanding the scientific method is a cave. Have you ever seen crops grow? In todays farms, the weeds have virtually no chance anyway. Feel free to visit the south. I see miles of crops every day without a weed in sight. Contrary to what you might believe, we in Mississipi don’t have slaves out in the fields pulling weeds all day, the pre-emergent herbicides take care of most of it and the various other treatments, including simple Roundup with the wicks wipe the rest out easily. Farming isn’t about controlling weeds anymore. Today it’s about maximizing yield for every square foot. Farmers use tracters with GPS systems tied into computer controlled machinery to put the fertilizer precisely where it’s needed. Science is solving problems while you parrot your pseudoscince nonsense which does nothing but try to draw in gullible idiots to parrot with you. BTW, some food crop plants are as hardy or hardier than the hardient weeds. See if you can figure out what they are. William R. James Who still cannot understand the difference between "All X’s are Y" and "There exist X’s which are Y" the latter being what the article quoted, indicated.

It’s called "data mining" and simply "lying". You should recognoize that with your experience of doing the same. So what’s your exist strategy William R. James?

My strategy is to exist, yes. What’s more important, saving face or the fate of the only liveable planet we have?

Saving the planet from scamspeddled by pseudoscience hoax peddlers like yourself. What will you say when it’s everyone except the Press Secretary for ExxonMobil, and you, who pretend there’s not climate change that’s human induced? Even Bush’s commerce Dept now admits it, on top of Bush’s EPA and the American Academy of Science and the US Geophysical Union and the IPCC and the vast, vast majority of scientists in every country on the planet.

Unlike you, I feel no compulsion to parrot anyone’s BS. I reaally don’t care who or how many are parroting BS, I’ll still note the scent. If you ever run across any actual science to support your claims, I assume you will point it out. Until then I’ll not hold my breath. You have painted yourself into a corner. I don’t get any thrill of out winning debates,

Good, otherwise, you might never have any thrills. I have bigger fish to fry, like pretending disasters on the planet.. I gain no satisfaction in humilating you,…

If you did, perhaps you would try harder to attempt to do it at least once. so, don’t reply to this question, but just ask yourself, as it becomes clear that you have been duped by the corporate pseudo science and propaganda, and you become the last 1% on the planet who denies climate change, how will you get out of the corner you’ve painted yourself into? Don’t paint yourself without an exit. It will be harder to play this "Denial is not just a river in Egypt" game in 2005 Wm James, and harder still in 2006. Have an exist strategy.

ROTFLMAO! This from a parrot who hasn’t a clue about science and does nothingbutparrot pseudoscience propaganda on a daily basis. I hhave no "exist strategy" other than to exist. If you mean "exit" strategy,I don’t need one. I’ve been quite consistant in my spport of the scientific method. That’s the basis of my opposition to your pseudoscience BS parading as science in direct opposition to all evidence, and your complete dismissal of real science,real physics, real chenistry,and reality in general. I know Limbaugh’s strategy: never ever ever admit he was wrong, and just scream in agner at those libr’ls and how we need even MORE deregulation to get us out of the mess he’s denied exists all these years…that’s his extreme level of Chutzpah.

Limbause is a superstitious practitioner. Like you, he believes in BS which defy the laws of nature. Hopefully our exist strategy will have more class…

Hopefully, you will some day attend a science class. William R. James

Response:

responded to in separate post. Addendum follows. Have you ever seen crops grow? In todays farms, the weeds have virtually no chance anyway. Feel free to visit the south.

I’ve lived in the south for years But let’s not confuse two different things: the fact that we drench the earth in poison (herbacides) so that hardly anything but the crop intended can live, is completely separate from whether CLIMATE can affect the crop in question, more than the weeds, or more than at least one weed or a few. The other point, that the article said "there exist weeds" not "All weeds" being hardier was in my other post. timeout

Response:

Oh, so now you think he’s a genius? Citing the "best possible scientific information," an administration official, James Mahoney, delivered a report to Congress that essentially reversed the previous White House position set out by George Bush, who had refused to link carbon dioxide emissions to climate change.

He was right. Two years ago, when his administration last published a document claiming that global warming over the last few decades had been prompted by human behaviour, Mr Bush dismissed it as something "put out by the bureaucracy".

He was wrong. Itwas and is a scam put out by frauds. One of Mr Bush’s first acts on the international scene as president was to refuse to ratify the Kyoto treaty, which aimed to cut emissions by 5.2% from 1990 levels by 2012 – prompting outrage throughout the world.

As if the kooks in the rest of the world matter… "We must argue with the Americans and get them to agree we have to have a global solution, and America is a very important part of that solution," the deputy prime minister, John Prescott, said at the time. But Mr Bush also alienated himself from members of his own cabinet as he overrode the recommendations of his newly-appointed head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Christine Todd Whitman. This was widely seen as a payback to the energy lobby which had donated a huge amount to his campaign.

Sounds good, doesnt it? Never mind reality if thew accusations sound good, right? At the time Mr Bush cast doubts on the science, claimed restrictions would hamper economic growth, and said the treaty was "unfair to the United States and to other industrialised nations" because it exempted developing countries.

There’s no "science" to cast doubt on! The global warming nonsense is no more scientific than "creation science" or "psychics". However, it will be far more difficult for him to distance himself from the current report, because it has been signed by the secretaries of energy and commerce in his administration. Coming just days before the Republican convention opens in New York, it is thought to be another attempt by the administration to show moderate leanings.

Yep, political pandering. He’s known for that. The report, which also quotes studies that indicate that carbon dioxide stimulates the growth of invasive weeds more than it does crops, is part of a regular series submitted to Congress to monitor global trends.

ROTFLMAO! Yeah right! Man made CO2 takes part in a conspiracy to only help the plants we don’t want, huh? Your pseudoscience BS is geting pretty funny. Mr Bush’s former allies in the energy industry criticised the findings. Myron Ebell, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the New York Times it was "another indication that the administration continues to be incoherent in its global warming policies".

So? Why not be incoherent regarding non-science nonsense? Environmentalists say the report’s conclusions simply highlight the distance between what the Bush administration has done and what good science suggests should be done.

Good science is real science, the practice f the scientific method. That’s a foreign concept to the "global warming" Chicken Little scam peddlers. "For four years the Bush administration has brought the international global warming negotiations to a virtual standstill by claiming that uncertainties in climate science do not justify the cost of tackling it," said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

ROTFLMAO! There’s a credible source! "Now they have finally accepted that CO2 is causing global warming, they have absolutely no excuse for not rejoining the Kyoto process. Every day they continue to stall will now be held to be criminally negligent by future generations."

The Kyoto scam wouldn’t do squat about the CO2 even if CO2 were causing global warming. All Kyoto is designed to to is transfer weath from US citizens and taxpayers to third world dictators and make americans buy the right to produce from the distators of countries which don’t produce. Wiliam R. James

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "Now they have finally accepted that CO2 is causing global warming, they have absolutely no excuse for not rejoining the Kyoto process. Every day they continue to stall will now be held to be criminally negligent by future generations." The Kyoto scam wouldn’t do squat about the CO2 even if CO2 were causing global warming. All Kyoto is designed to to is transfer weath from US citizens and taxpayers to third world dictators and make "transfer [wealth] from US citizens and taxpayers to third world dictators You must be thinking of the military budget…" americans buy the right to produce from the distators of countries which don’t produce. Wiliam R. James A fool who’s never heard of weeds that are more hardy than the particular food crop one is planting. Must be living in a cave. Not unless you thing the 21st century is a cave. Ans not unless you think being educated is a cave. And not unless you think understanding the scientific method is a cave. Have you ever seen crops grow? In todays farms, the weeds have virtually no chance anyway. Feel free to visit the south. I see miles of crops every day without a weed in sight. Contrary to what you might believe, we in Mississipi don’t have slaves out in the fields pulling weeds all day, the pre-emergent herbicides take care of most of it and the various other treatments, including simple Roundup with the wicks wipe the rest out easily. Farming isn’t about controlling weeds anymore. Today it’s about maximizing yield for every square foot. Farmers use tracters with GPS systems tied into computer controlled machinery to put the fertilizer precisely where it’s needed. Science is solving problems while you parrot your pseudoscince nonsense which does nothing but try to draw in gullible idiots to parrot with you. BTW, some food crop plants are as hardy or hardier than the hardient weeds. See if you can figure out what they are. William R. James

Who still cannot understand the difference between "All X’s are Y" and "There exist X’s which are Y" the latter being what the article quoted, indicated. So what’s your exist strategy William R. James? What’s more important, saving face or the fate of the only liveable planet we have? What will you say when it’s everyone except the Press Secretary for ExxonMobil, and you, who pretend there’s not climate change that’s human induced? Even Bush’s commerce Dept now admits it, on top of Bush’s EPA and the American Academy of Science and the US Geophysical Union and the IPCC and the vast, vast majority of scientists in every country on the planet. You have painted yourself into a corner. I don’t get any thrill of out winning debates, I have bigger fish to fry, like pretending disasters on the planet.. I gain no satisfaction in humilating you,…so, don’t reply to this question, but just ask yourself, as it becomes clear that you have been duped by the corporate pseudo science and propaganda, and you become the last 1% on the planet who denies climate change, how will you get out of the corner you’ve painted yourself into? Don’t paint yourself without an exit. It will be harder to play this "Denial is not just a river in Egypt" game in 2005 Wm James, and harder still in 2006. Have an exist strategy. I know Limbaugh’s strategy: never ever ever admit he was wrong, and just scream in agner at those libr’ls and how we need even MORE deregulation to get us out of the mess he’s denied exists all these years…that’s his extreme level of Chutzpah. Hopefully our exist strategy will have more class…

Response:

Not unless you thing the 21st century is a cave. Ans not unless you think being educated is a cave. And not unless you think understanding the scientific method is a cave. Have you ever seen crops grow? In todays farms, the weeds have virtually no chance anyway. Feel free to visit the south. I see miles of crops every day without a weed in sight. Contrary to what you might believe, we in Mississipi don’t have slaves out in the fields pulling weeds all day, the pre-emergent herbicides take care of most of it and the various other treatments, including simple Roundup with the wicks wipe the rest out easily. Farming isn’t about controlling weeds anymore. Today it’s about maximizing yield for every square foot. Farmers use tracters with GPS systems tied into computer controlled machinery to put the fertilizer precisely where it’s needed. Science is solving problems while you parrot your pseudoscince nonsense which does nothing but try to draw in gullible idiots to parrot with you. BTW, some food crop plants are as hardy or hardier than the hardient weeds. See if you can figure out what they are. William R. James

Response:

"Now they have finally accepted that CO2 is causing global warming, they have absolutely no excuse for not rejoining the Kyoto process. Every day they continue to stall will now be held to be criminally negligent by future generations." The Kyoto scam wouldn’t do squat about the CO2 even if CO2 were causing global warming. All Kyoto is designed to to is transfer weath from US citizens and taxpayers to third world dictators and make

"transfer [wealth] from US citizens and taxpayers to third world dictators You must be thinking of the military budget…" americans buy the right to produce from the distators of countries which don’t produce. Wiliam R. James

A fool who’s never heard of weeds that are more hardy than the particular food crop one is planting. Must be living in a cave.

Response:

And in fact, the rest of the world seems to be learning from our past mistakes, and implementing better pollution controls as they grow their economies. <http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/29/weekinreview/29revk.html It’s still no excuse for us not to clean up our own act. — Where was AWOL George W. Bush? <http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm Any government will waste money. Only the worst waste lives.

Response:

Well, I guess third world countries need to follow our example and reduce emmissions. Prime examples of heavily polluted air I’ve seen first hand are in coutries like Malaysia, Egypt, Thailand, and western Europe. SikOfLibs

Difficult concept but we consume 25% of the worlds resources (oil/gas). We are 5% of the worlds population. We are ’supposedly’ the worlds leader. So why is it exactly that we are going to shoulder the burden of cutting pollution on those who use the least of our resources? Even if they had 100% compliance with whatever standards that may be made, their impact on the problem would be little to nothing. We are the users. We are the ones who must act. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bush u-turn on climate change wins few friends Gary Younge Friday August 27, 2004 The Guardian In a dramatic reversal of its previous position, the White House this week conceded that emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases were the only likely explanation for global warming. Citing the "best possible scientific information," an administration official, James Mahoney, delivered a report to Congress that essentially reversed the previous White House position set out by George Bush, who had refused to link carbon dioxide emissions to climate change. Two years ago, when his administration last published a document claiming that global warming over the last few decades had been prompted by human behaviour, Mr Bush dismissed it as something "put out by the bureaucracy". One of Mr Bush’s first acts on the international scene as president was to refuse to ratify the Kyoto treaty, which aimed to cut emissions by 5.2% from 1990 levels by 2012 – prompting outrage throughout the world. "We must argue with the Americans and get them to agree we have to have a global solution, and America is a very important part of that solution," the deputy prime minister, John Prescott, said at the time. But Mr Bush also alienated himself from members of his own cabinet as he overrode the recommendations of his newly-appointed head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Christine Todd Whitman. This was widely seen as a payback to the energy lobby which had donated a huge amount to his campaign. At the time Mr Bush cast doubts on the science, claimed restrictions would hamper economic growth, and said the treaty was "unfair to the United States and to other industrialised nations" because it exempted developing countries. However, it will be far more difficult for him to distance himself from the current report, because it has been signed by the secretaries of energy and commerce in his administration. Coming just days before the Republican convention opens in New York, it is thought to be another attempt by the administration to show moderate leanings. The report, which also quotes studies that indicate that carbon dioxide stimulates the growth of invasive weeds more than it does crops, is part of a regular series submitted to Congress to monitor global trends. Mr Bush’s former allies in the energy industry criticised the findings. Myron Ebell, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the New York Times it was "another indication that the administration continues to be incoherent in its global warming policies". Environmentalists say the report’s conclusions simply highlight the distance between what the Bush administration has done and what good science suggests should be done. "For four years the Bush administration has brought the international global warming negotiations to a virtual standstill by claiming that uncertainties in climate science do not justify the cost of tackling it," said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace. "Now they have finally accepted that CO2 is causing global warming, they have absolutely no excuse for not rejoining the Kyoto process. Every day they continue to stall will now be held to be criminally negligent by future generations." http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1291986,00.html DON’T MOURN, ACT! WEBSITES FOR ACTION: http://www.earthshare.org/get_involved/involved.html http://www.gristmagazine.com/dogood/climate.asp http://www.greenhousenet.org/ http://www.solarcatalyst.com/ Overview and local actions you can take: http://www.PostCarbon.org = = = = STILL FEELING LIKE THE MAINSTREAM U.S. CORPORATE MEDIA IS GIVING A FULL HONEST PICTURE OF WHAT’S GOING ON? = = = = Daily online radio show, news reporting: www.DemocracyNow.org = = = = Sorry, we cannot read/reply to most usenet posts but welcome email For more information: http://EconomicDemocracy.org/wtc/ (peace) And http://EconomicDemocracy.org/ (general) ** ANTI-SPAM EMAIL NOTE: For email "info" and "map" don’t work. Email instead ** to m-a-i-l-m-a-i-l (without the dashes) at economicdemocracy.org

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bush u-turn on climate change wins few friends Gary Younge Friday August 27, 2004 The Guardian In a dramatic reversal of its previous position, the White House this week conceded that emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases were the only likely explanation for global warming. Citing the "best possible scientific information," an administration official, James Mahoney, delivered a report to Congress that essentially reversed the previous White House position set out by George Bush, who had refused to link carbon dioxide emissions to climate change. Two years ago, when his administration last published a document claiming that global warming over the last few decades had been prompted by human behaviour, Mr Bush dismissed it as something "put out by the bureaucracy". One of Mr Bush’s first acts on the international scene as president was to refuse to ratify the Kyoto treaty, which aimed to cut emissions by 5.2% from 1990 levels by 2012 – prompting outrage throughout the world. "We must argue with the Americans and get them to agree we have to have a global solution, and America is a very important part of that solution," the deputy prime minister, John Prescott, said at the time. But Mr Bush also alienated himself from members of his own cabinet as he overrode the recommendations of his newly-appointed head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Christine Todd Whitman. This was widely seen as a payback to the energy lobby which had donated a huge amount to his campaign. At the time Mr Bush cast doubts on the science, claimed restrictions would hamper economic growth, and said the treaty was "unfair to the United States and to other industrialised nations" because it exempted developing countries. However, it will be far more difficult for him to distance himself from the current report, because it has been signed by the secretaries of energy and commerce in his administration. Coming just days before the Republican convention opens in New York, it is thought to be another attempt by the administration to show moderate leanings. The report, which also quotes studies that indicate that carbon dioxide stimulates the growth of invasive weeds more than it does crops, is part of a regular series submitted to Congress to monitor global trends. Mr Bush’s former allies in the energy industry criticised the findings. Myron Ebell, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the New York Times it was "another indication that the administration continues to be incoherent in its global warming policies". Environmentalists say the report’s conclusions simply highlight the distance between what the Bush administration has done and what good science suggests should be done. "For four years the Bush administration has brought the international global warming negotiations to a virtual standstill by claiming that uncertainties in climate science do not justify the cost of tackling it," said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace. "Now they have finally accepted that CO2 is causing global warming, they have absolutely no excuse for not rejoining the Kyoto process. Every day they continue to stall will now be held to be criminally negligent by future generations." http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1291986,00.html DON’T MOURN, ACT! WEBSITES FOR ACTION: http://www.earthshare.org/get_involved/involved.html http://www.gristmagazine.com/dogood/climate.asp http://www.greenhousenet.org/ http://www.solarcatalyst.com/ Overview and local actions you can take: http://www.PostCarbon.org = = = = STILL FEELING LIKE THE MAINSTREAM U.S. CORPORATE MEDIA IS GIVING A FULL HONEST PICTURE OF WHAT’S GOING ON? = = = = Daily online radio show, news reporting: www.DemocracyNow.org = = = = Sorry, we cannot read/reply to most usenet posts but welcome email For more information: http://EconomicDemocracy.org/wtc/ (peace) And http://EconomicDemocracy.org/ (general) ** ANTI-SPAM EMAIL NOTE: For email "info" and "map" don’t work. Email instead ** to m-a-i-l-m-a-i-l (without the dashes) at economicdemocracy.org

Response:

Bush u-turn on climate change wins few friends Gary Younge Friday August 27, 2004 The Guardian In a dramatic reversal of its previous position, the White House this week conceded that emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases were the only likely explanation for global warming. Citing the "best possible scientific information," an administration official, James Mahoney, delivered a report to Congress that essentially reversed the previous White House position set out by George Bush, who had refused to link carbon dioxide emissions to climate change. Two years ago, when his administration last published a document claiming that global warming over the last few decades had been prompted by human behaviour, Mr Bush dismissed it as something "put out by the bureaucracy". One of Mr Bush’s first acts on the international scene as president was to refuse to ratify the Kyoto treaty, which aimed to cut emissions by 5.2% from 1990 levels by 2012 – prompting outrage throughout the world. "We must argue with the Americans and get them to agree we have to have a global solution, and America is a very important part of that solution," the deputy prime minister, John Prescott, said at the time. But Mr Bush also alienated himself from members of his own cabinet as he overrode the recommendations of his newly-appointed head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Christine Todd Whitman. This was widely seen as a payback to the energy lobby which had donated a huge amount to his campaign. At the time Mr Bush cast doubts on the science, claimed restrictions would hamper economic growth, and said the treaty was "unfair to the United States and to other industrialised nations" because it exempted developing countries. However, it will be far more difficult for him to distance himself from the current report, because it has been signed by the secretaries of energy and commerce in his administration. Coming just days before the Republican convention opens in New York, it is thought to be another attempt by the administration to show moderate leanings. The report, which also quotes studies that indicate that carbon dioxide stimulates the growth of invasive weeds more than it does crops, is part of a regular series submitted to Congress to monitor global trends. Mr Bush’s former allies in the energy industry criticised the findings. Myron Ebell, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the New York Times it was "another indication that the administration continues to be incoherent in its global warming policies". Environmentalists say the report’s conclusions simply highlight the distance between what the Bush administration has done and what good science suggests should be done. "For four years the Bush administration has brought the international global warming negotiations to a virtual standstill by claiming that uncertainties in climate science do not justify the cost of tackling it," said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace. "Now they have finally accepted that CO2 is causing global warming, they have absolutely no excuse for not rejoining the Kyoto process. Every day they continue to stall will now be held to be criminally negligent by future generations." http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1291986,00.html DON’T MOURN, ACT! WEBSITES FOR ACTION: http://www.earthshare.org/get_involved/involved.html http://www.gristmagazine.com/dogood/climate.asp http://www.greenhousenet.org/ http://www.solarcatalyst.com/ Overview and local actions you can take: http://www.PostCarbon.org = = = = STILL FEELING LIKE THE MAINSTREAM U.S. CORPORATE MEDIA IS GIVING A FULL HONEST PICTURE OF WHAT’S GOING ON? = = = = Daily online radio show, news reporting: www.DemocracyNow.org = = = = Sorry, we cannot read/reply to most usenet posts but welcome email For more information: http://EconomicDemocracy.org/wtc/ (peace) And http://EconomicDemocracy.org/ (general) ** ANTI-SPAM EMAIL NOTE: For email "info" and "map" don’t work. Email instead ** to m-a-i-l-m-a-i-l (without the dashes) at economicdemocracy.org

Response:

Filed under: Activism

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.

Activism Change

Learn, read, react :: Activism