shepard145

Sat, Nov 21, 2009 : 11:45 a.m.

I am not sure where you went to school but carbon monoxide generated by coal fired power plants is most certainly NOT lethal in any way unless you can tell us how many Americans died of power plant carbon monoxide poisoning last year!? LOL. Do you believe that wind and solar power are substitutes for coal and nuclear? LOL or some mysterious bio mass made from swamp scum? Al Gore gets a pass because while shaking down the gullible for millions with his global warming schemes, he has the same level of scientific knowledge as the average eco hysteric none. The power provided by existing coal plants is the most economical in the country, which benefits every resident and business who PAYS FOR IT. The clean energy nonsense pushed by government nitwits is just the opposite, a prosperity tax that will continue to kill businesses and jobs as our economy in return for ZERO BENEFITS. Is that hard to figure out? Your hero, Jennifer Granholm, is a national laughing stock for many reasons but this is certainly a stand out. This is not about the incomes of these mysterious coal billionaires (LOL businesses are own by shareholders who range from children to grand mothers) as youve been taught in Democrat Class Warfare 101, but the future of the United States economy and its ability to compete globallyor not. Beware of prophets seeking profits!!

ann_arbor_guy

Fri, Nov 20, 2009 : 2:40 p.m.

LongFellow you missed my point completely. The detrimental effect of burning fossil fuels on living beings is not junk science. I am not sure where you went to school, but carbon monoxide is lethal and dangerous. The reason that I give a billionaire like Al Gore a pass is because I happen to believe that we should be moving away from an energy source that is toxic. The oil and coal billionaires are more concerned about their profits then my well being. That in my opinion is unadulterated greed, money earned at the expense of everything and everyone around them. I am not opposed to anyone earning a decent living, but just dont do it at the expense of all living things.

Bill Wilson

Fri, Nov 20, 2009 : 11:31 a.m.

"That's right, the good guys are the oil and coal companies,they have our best interest at heart. Poor billionaires; they are just trying to make a buck." ann_arbor_guy, Your post is revealing: the oil & coal providers are bad guys because they make money. I'm always puzzled by this (sic) argument. Do you not yourself work? Are you paid? And what do you do with this profit? Surely you use transportation of some sort. You must also heat your living area. These companies are merely providing the fuel, you are the one using it. You're part of the problem, are you not? It's also curious that you don't seem to be angry at someone like Al Gore, a guy making a buck selling nonsense as fact. This is pure greed. Why does Al get a pass from you? No one would disagree that steps need to be taken to ensure that your home is as safe as we can make it from carcinogens. But attempts to foist junk science on us while giving yourself and people like Al a pass do nothing but destroy your argument's credibility.

ann_arbor_guy

Thu, Nov 19, 2009 : 11:37 p.m.

That's right, the good guys are the oil and coal companies,they have our best interest at heart. Poor billionaires; they are just trying to make a buck. I love the smell of coal burning, who cares if it is a carcinogen, we all only live about 80 years anyway. Even if global warming is true, I will be dead by the time it happens. Nobody is going to tell me that unfiltered coal or oil burning is not the best thing for our society.

lancer

Thu, Nov 19, 2009 : 11:05 p.m.

In the 1600s, Mr. Appleyard would have been an vocal member of Flat Earth Club, the last group that based science on consensus. For some reason, Mr. Appleyard does not want to count in his consensus the votes of the 119 earth scientists that signed a letter to President Obama and published it in major newspapers on Nov 19, 2008, saying that the alarm regarding climate change is grossly overstated. He is probably not familiar with the work of Professor Richard S. Lindzen of MIT who proved false the claims made in the FAR (Fourth Annual Report) of the IPCC (Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change). One well-published climate expert observed that those earth scientists who sound the alarm on climate change are primarily modelers while the scientists who study the earths climate by looking back over hundreds of thousands of years see nothing unusual about todays climate. Mr. Appleyard would learn a lot by watching the new DVD, Not Evil Just Wrong, responding to Al Gores sensationalist and error-filled, An Inconvenient Truth.

stunhsif

Thu, Nov 19, 2009 : 6:34 p.m.

David and AAFish, You guys can really say you believe Al Gore and his global warming garbage? If so, I have Swamp Land in the Sahara desert I will sell you for 10 million carbon offset dollars!!!! I will give Al Gore credit, he has made chumps of all us hard working stiffs. He turned a hoax into hundreds of millions of dollars for himself. God Bless America, the only place in the world where a ding dong like Al Gore can get rich peddling snake oil!!!

Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball

Thu, Nov 19, 2009 : 8:39 a.m.

All deniers should be lined up and shot on site. Stop talking. There is NOOOOOO debate allowed. Just be quiet. Stop talking. NO dissent allowed here.

Bill Wilson

Wed, Nov 18, 2009 : 1:30 p.m.

Thought you all might enjoy this: Al Gore, displaying his vast knowledge of science: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDcxYThlNzBkOTcyM2EzZmM2MDEyNjFjOGQ3ZmE5M2M=

Bill Wilson

Wed, Nov 18, 2009 : 10:13 a.m.

" It was merely to point out the difference in which the two families derive their income." David, So, yours is a Bush vs Gore family distinction, and the Bush family are the "War profiteers?" Can you cite any proof that the Bush family made their money from the war in Iraq? Unfortunately, every time we hear these conspiracy theories, the proof turns out to be a 20-some year old document made with Microsoft Word or a ''trust me, Bush knew about 9-11 and the twin towers were brought down by a controlled demolition" type statement. Sorry, but after so many years of this, we no longer can trust you.

David Briegel

Wed, Nov 18, 2009 : 7:53 a.m.

It was merely to point out the difference in which the two families derive their income. "Big Al" is bad and the War Profiteers are good? Al invests in what he believes in. So do the Bush's!

AAFish

Tue, Nov 17, 2009 : 7:52 p.m.

So this is all about bashing Al Gore, it would seem. Why am I not surprised?

David Briegel

Tue, Nov 17, 2009 : 4:36 p.m.

That evil Al Gore. Making money. Imagine, him a capitalist! Never one word about the Bush's, Cheney, NEOCON's and the Perpetual War Profiteers. No ill begotten gains there? Noble patriots all! Prophets seeking profits, that's a great description!

Martin Church

Tue, Nov 17, 2009 : 12:45 p.m.

Big Idea, If you want money scare congress into thinking something will happen. In the 70's we had Global cooling and an Ice Age was about to happen. In the 80's we were told if we did not do away with can deordants and change what we used in car air conditioners a big Hole would open and all of our Ozone would leak out. Now the late 90's and 2000 we have global warming or climate change. all have caused congress to spend billions of our tax dollars and thousands of US Jobs on scare memos. sounds like a Sci-fi TV show. Now we see after sending up three rovers (1 british 2 americans and all electric) Mars temperature is rising. Some call for real science, then lets put it in a test tube and test it. Oh that's right without the scare you don't get the money.

shepard145

Mon, Nov 16, 2009 : 1:19 p.m.

For good reason. While Al Gore has made several tens of millions of dollars from his "Global Warming" schemes, and considered a "scientist" by many, he in fact has a 4 year degree in "Government" where he finished in the bottom fifth of his class. Beware of prophets seeking profits.

AAFish

Mon, Nov 16, 2009 : 1:09 p.m.

The deniers are out in full force, I see.

shepard145

Sun, Nov 15, 2009 : 7:49 p.m.

I am disappointed by those who view science worker polling as a "consensus", ie substitute for the scientific method. This is not the first time bad science has been twisted and embraced by passionate amateurs. Climate models tumble into gibberish every few years as they are proven wrong by actual data. Meanwhile, eco hysterics find no irony in complaining about the quality of data in the 1970's eminent ice age crackpots yet less then forty years later claim we now have "data trends" on a 4,500,000,000 year old planet. Many would also claim that George W. Will (enemy du jour) must be handsomely paid by a ninja-like triad of shadow funders who meet at an island fortress to plan doom for the planet. Written language is about 7,600 years old and as noted above 18,000 years ago 2/3 of the earth was under an ice sheet more then 5,000 feet thick....but our data since 1975 is much better then it was even though the earth is now cooling!!?? LOL Really!? With all this, the "American Taxpayer Controlled Global Climate" crowd insists that since humans have an established society complete with beach front resorts and big cities, the earth's climate must stop changing.....or we can MAKE IT STOP CHANGING. Really? What if, as actual MIT scientific research indicates, humans have no meaningful ability to change the earth's temperature (let alone American Taxpayers)? What happens to this discussion, the UN and Global Summits?

John Galt

Sun, Nov 15, 2009 : 2:23 p.m.

The weather and climate is always changing. I think it was a brilliant political move to use the weather as an excuse to implement "change." However, the man-made global warming debate is a farce. The planet has gone through several geologically recent ice ages. This very spot (Ann Arbor) was covered in over 1 mile of ice only 12,000 years ago. It then melted (i.e. global warming). The process occured a half dozen times over the past 2 million years. It created the Great Lakes. No human help was required. And there is NOT scientific consensus on this issue. It is simply another political ploy used by environmentalists to achieve goals. Goals that could be achieved (in many cases) by logic and truth--not scare tactics. Now we can watch as the rest of the economy shuts down after implementing cap-and-tax. Companies will move overseas faster.

shepard145

Sun, Nov 15, 2009 : 1:05 p.m.

So your concern is not the lack of scientific evidence supporting "Global Warming", but that there is any debate of the topic at all after a Newsweek reporter with no scientific credentials took her moment in the spotlight to declare "the debate if over" in 2005? As a rule born out by history, whenever debate is interpreted as a threat to "consensus", something is rotten. If that "consensus" has the potential to greatly expand government rule and power over our daily lives "for our own good" and includes demands for censorship of the opposing press, the stench increases exponentially. I have yet to see any compelling scientific research proving that Americans control "Global Climate" via changes compelled by the bill. Anything short of a 'cause and effect' relationship between the democrat's economy-killing Cap and Trade bill and corresponding alterations to global temperature expose this issue and bill for what they really are, another fascist grab of private sector businesses by an expansive, corrupt, economy killing government.

antikvetch

Sun, Nov 15, 2009 : 12:03 p.m.

By all means, let us stifle all dissenting opinions, Herr Appleyard.