If the "discussion" is being financed by the Govt., and large sums of grant money are involved, the outcome will surely please whomever it has to to keep the dollars rolling in.

The Govt. is setting policy by looking at one side of the "discussion". Don't sweat the conflicting data. "It's been hot or cold lately where I live" doesn't prove anything about climate change. Thousands of years of data may not be enough to prove or disprove anything. Mans involvement is harder to prove. I just think it's another attempt by the Govt. to not let a crisis go to waste, whether the crisis is real or perceived.

So, what do you think about all the climate change information being generated, examined, and discussed having nothing at all to do with our government (especially financing) or any other?

Conflicting mostly. Not in urgent need of massive tax hikes that rely on still developing technologies that may do more to increase global warming, but will almost definitely hurt our economy and cause a further loss in manufacturing jobs.

??? Really? Where? How?

Some say man has no effect. Some say man is responsible. Some say warming. Some say cooling. Some say the discussion is over.

Even if global warming is a danger and man made, Cap and Trade makes no sense as all it will do is result in less carbon emission from the US and increases of carbon emission in foreign country's that will expand production on virtually everything minus solar panels, wind mills and any other US subsidized industry that in essence will serve as a second tax Cap and Trade provides. Since their factories are far less efficient and their power plants less regulated I'd say more carbon will be produced. More US jobs, specifically in the production and transportation industries will be lost. (Will Mexican trucking and foreign shipping companies be taxed? How about Chinese factories and coal plants providing energy to those factories)

IMO it's kind of like trying to put out a grease fire in the kitchen with a bucket of water while the rest of the house is on fire. Much better to stand back be safe and come up with another plan provided the house is actually on fire.

And with the economy and unemployment in its current state this is the last thing we need to do.

By the way how much carbon was released by all those great firework shows this weekend?

Sun spots have far more to deal with cooling/warming than man ever has. What a bunch horse **** global warming is. One of the coolest years on record is this year. Snow in NE in June.

Why is it so hard for people to frame their arguments when it comes to this issue? Your first sentence is a great point worth debating. Then your last three sentences completely detract from your point. Pointing to single occurrences or single years of data is completely useless and for some reason is always the ploy of global warming deniers. There is a great argument that global warming is not man-made. But there is no denying that global warming is occurring:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate...ror-bar-pg.gif

No, that's not true. Outside of the government, out within the global scientific community, there is overwhelming agreement regarding the big picture issues you outline.

Seriously - the political considerations have to be separated from scientific reality here. They are not one and the same. Disbelieving climate change isn't occuring because someone doesn't like Al Gore or the Democrats (not saying that's you, just an example) is like disbelieving the world isn't flat because someone doesn't like Italians.

The climate is always changing. I'd like to separate it too. No cap and trade.

I think you need to apologize to all Italians for comparing them to Al Gore or is this so complicated only Jimmy Carter ( J.C. apparently to you and O'B only able to understand?)

and before you respond give me some Carter views you agree w/related to his understanding of the mid-east?

please enlighten me on my view that



Even if global warming is a danger and man made, Cap and Trade makes no sense as all it will do is result in less carbon emission from the US and increases of carbon emission in foreign country's that will expand production on virtually everything minus solar panels, wind mills and any other US subsidized industry that in essence will serve as a second tax Cap and Trade provides. Since their factories are far less efficient and their power plants less regulated I'd say more carbon will be produced. More US jobs, specifically in the production and transportation industries will be lost. (Will Mexican trucking and foreign shipping companies be taxed? How about Chinese factories and coal plants providing energy to those factories)

:zz:

I'll pay for your reading comprehension course.

and you need some common sense and realize you were a Dem all along. Now tell me where you exactly came up with the belief Carter has a deep understanding of the mid-east?

??? I think you need to go back to the other thread and read what I wrote about Carter in the first place.

save me the time you don't think he has a understanding of the mid east kind of like Obama?

Dell..if someone's view of the Middle East disagrees with yours, does that mean they have no understanding of the Middle East?

And no...this is not a Steven Wright joke..

only if they agree ending a six day war, transferring the oil rich Sinai Peninsula from Israel to Egypt, the Egyptian leader assassinated 3 yrs later, the Israeli leader resigning 5 yrs later while American's waited for odd or even days to get gas while we provided defense aid to both is the result of 'understanding' and then coming to the conclusion Israel is the worse perpetrator of human rights abuse, worse than Rwanda on earth. (just to keep on subject) lol