Posted on 12/17/2009 10:53:45 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
For an hypothesis to be credible, it must have credible evidence which supports it. Computer models which have been tweaked to provide the "correct" result do not count.
I guess my question is, wtf is Carl M. Cannon and what did he state in this article that we don't already know?
“This assertion didn’t strike Schwarzenegger, who has initiated a sweeping array of measures in California to lower carbon emissions, as very well thought out.”
These “sweeping array of measures” are the reason why California is bankrupt?
Ahnold is a girly man. Maybe his ol;s Maplethorpe pictures should make the rounds..
Schwarzenegger is a 90 pound weakling next to Maria.
Are you kidding? THOSE ARE THE GOALS!
I don’t know what Ah-Nuld is, but he sure ain’t a Republican.
I don’t know what Ah-Nuld is, but he sure ain’t a Republican.
Eghad. Carl M. Cannon, Washington Bureau Chief for Reader’s Digest, formerly White House correspondent for the Baltimore Sun.
He’s all for Global Warming.
That’s all we need to know about Carl M. Cannon and hsi pathetic little piece.
Sarah is anti-corruption, therefore is a target for everybody who is working to use this scam to bleed trillions from the productive sectors of the economy.
Palin to Schwarzenegger: “Hasta la vista, baby.”
When Arnold married into the Kennedy periphery family, that was the beginning of the end of his manhood but he had already lost his brain when he was born in socialist/communist Europe and all that crap rubbed off.
Good one!
Arnold isn’t in Sarah’s league, not even close. Whatever it was he thought he had to offer, he’s thrown away with failure after failure, mistake after mistake, and all because he lacked the character and intelligence necessary to be a conservative. For those libtard Republicans who thought Arnold was the way to victory, ...no thanks. That isn’t winning.
the credible theory” of AGW.
By definition a theory has be a question that can be proven or disproven. Pray tell, what data, or experiment, will prove or disprove AGW? If you can’t prove it or disprove it, it is by definition not a theory, but a belief. This is the basis of all science. Belief, the knowing of the unknowable, is what is referred to as religion. There is a vast difference between the two. Now, how do you prove or disprove AGW? Can some smart person tell me?
It's arguable that Arnold's governance even represents a step-up from Gray Davis.
Given the ENORMOUS impact on living standards, the dislocation and trauma on people living in energy producing regions, income re-distribution from the wealthy to the poor, the income distribution from the rich nations to the poorer nations, the devastation on countries that rely on carbon emmitting energy for their wealth, and on global trade, the huge effort rshaping economies, shouldn’t we be a bit more certain than simply a “credible theory”?
Are you kidding? THOSE ARE THE GOALS!
Ummm, yeah. I’d say that they probably are the goals (AGW is a socialist agenda), but they certainly are some of thee impacts.
Most of us in the US rightly focus on the science (or lack of it) at this stage, ie, data integrity, fraud, linkage of Co2 with heating etc.
But in countries where carbon trading is imminent or happening, there is far more discussion on the economic impacts.
Think about this: do you believe the science? Even if you did, and in countries that agree and are considering carbon tax or equivalent schemes, there is enormous concern on whether the truth is being told about the economic impacts. The current goals by most nations are a 15% reduction on 1990 levels by 2020. But that will make no difference to their goals on climate change. It will need to be 50%. And even that may not be enough. They are trying to ease the door open (15%), before opening the floodgates (50% plus) on targets at this stage. Because even they couldn’t fudge the economic impact of 50% reductions, even if it was implemented consistently across all nations.
The economic impacts are huge.
There was much hope for Schwarzenegger when he was elected much like Obummer. That hope has been dashed bitterly just as we are seeing that occur with Obummer. He tried to paint himself as a moderate during the campaign but he was really a far left radical extremist commie stooge and zombie sheep.
Oh, while I’m at it ...
The other impact of a C&T is BIG BIG government. Everywhere, at every level. The liberal/socialist dream!
In income redistribution, in aid packages to businesses (finacial aid or relocation/retooling etc costs), in trade, and in investing directly and supporting alternative technologies, regulations in moving away from carbon usuage in the home, buildings, cars, farms etc.
That strikes me as a little harsh, maybe. I'm more inclined to label Schwarzenegger as a notably weak-willed politician...who's really not very smart.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.