Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Greening of Gingrich (Newt joins the ecotard chorus)
Human Events ^ | April 10, 2007 | Amanda B. Carpenter

Posted on 04/10/2007 1:19:25 PM PDT by xjcsa

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-210 next last
To: xjcsa
Just great. Should I be ashamed at being disappointed here??

It is one thing to say that human activity COULD be contributing to the (undeniable) short-term warming trend, which may also simply be a natural fluctuation. I personally see in the data the possibility that humans are having a small effect, and that this effect is dominated by natural solar and terrestrial cycles and quasi-random fluctuations; our poor understanding of these phenomena underpin the uncertainty in attributing a magnitude of blame to human activity.

It is no secret (except to the public, through the machinations of grant-junkies and the ignorant and/or lying press) that all current models for predicting future climate trends explicitly assume model parameters corresponding to the ascribing of all short-term heating to human activity. There are currently no "ab initio" climate models capable of back-reconstructing more than a decade or two of climate data; the interesting thing here is that multiple models, with vastly different dynamics and input parameters, lead to basically any reconstruction you want to cook up. Independent tests of the models - for example, checking how robust they are by back-reconstructing over twice the timescale - are not yet possible. The field is that immature (I mean that in the scientific sense - this is indeed science, and very important science, but the field is at such an early stage that it is the height of irresponsibility to impose current findings upon the scientifically untrained individuals who form public policy).

61 posted on 04/10/2007 2:03:15 PM PDT by M203M4 (Blood, sweat, fear, tears, death. Liberty is worth all costs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

LOL!


62 posted on 04/10/2007 2:04:06 PM PDT by proud American in Canada ("We can, and we will prevail.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LiveFree99

There are some interesting perspectives on that Takeover thing.

But that said, I completely agree with you. We need to thank him for his service and send him home. Wish we could do that with a lot more politicians a lot more frequently.


63 posted on 04/10/2007 2:04:51 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Vision

Yes. I will maintain the list. This is nothing new; Newt has held this position for a while.

Do I agree with him? No.

But it’s not a deal breaker, because I think he will offer more sensible solutions than the other candidates.

I don’t know which of the other candidates don’t buy into the global warming schtick.


64 posted on 04/10/2007 2:08:23 PM PDT by B Knotts (Newt '08! FReepmail me to get on the Newt '08 Ping List)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
I appreciate your hard work but please take me off the list.
65 posted on 04/10/2007 2:10:10 PM PDT by Vision ("Delight yourself with the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart." Psalm37:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

No to Rudy, McInsane, Romney and now, Newt.

Boy, the ‘Pubbies are fielding a lousy bunch of candidates. Go Hunter/Thompson!


66 posted on 04/10/2007 2:11:27 PM PDT by Little Ray (Rudy Guiliani: if his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AuntB
"Gingrich said there were two undisptued areas of scientific consensus on global warming: that the earth is getting hotter and the warming has been caused by human activity."

That just isn't true. There is no consensus on either point. There isn't a day goes by that I don't read a story or two from scientists disputing one or both. There is an online petition (the Petition Project) that now has over 17,000 signatures, most of them by scientists who refute the case for global warming. I believe the it can be found at oism.org.

67 posted on 04/10/2007 2:13:09 PM PDT by Russ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: c-b 1
I’ve been saying that Newt was a closet Global Socialist for over ten years.

Joined at the hip with Grover Norquist. Have you heard about their environmental non profit with Gale Norton? It was going before Gale was named sec. of Interior.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Council_of_Republicans_for_Environmental_Advocacy History

CREA was founded in 1998 by Gale Norton, George W. Bush's Bush's Secretary of the Interior.

In a profile of Norton, the Natural Resources Defense Council wrote of CREA that "true pro-environment Republicans, the Republicans for Environmental Protection, have called her group a 'green scam'."

1. BACK SCRATCHING AND GREENWASHING

http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/030105/DOJ.html

The Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, a nonprofit organization founded by Interior Secretary Gale Norton and Grover Norquist, has been subpoenaed by "an interagency criminal task force investigating former lobbyist Jack Abramoff." Abramoff and associates are being investigated for "their dealings with Indian tribes." CREA received significant contributions from tribes represented by Abramoff, as a quid pro quo for help with "the tribes' lobbying of the Interior Department," according to anonymous sources. CREA is a "staunch supporter of the Bush administration's environmental policies," and has been called a "greenscam" by Republicans for Environmental Protection, for taking mining, logging, chemical and coal industry money.

SOURCE: The Hill, March 1, 2005

http://www.organicconsumers.org/politics/prwatch30305.cfm

68 posted on 04/10/2007 2:15:29 PM PDT by AuntB (" It takes more than walking across the border to be an American." Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

I guess he figured he wasn’t going to get the GOP Pres nod anyway, so why not go for broke?


69 posted on 04/10/2007 2:17:13 PM PDT by Antoninus (I don't vote for liberals, regardless of party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kerretarded

Oh, my.


70 posted on 04/10/2007 2:17:15 PM PDT by AuntB (" It takes more than walking across the border to be an American." Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

Boy, the ‘Pubbies are fielding a lousy bunch of candidates. Go Hunter/Thompson!

I hope they don’t disappoint the FREEPERS! That is not a good thing to do. lol.


71 posted on 04/10/2007 2:19:13 PM PDT by napscoordinator (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
Re #37

Gingrich is not now and, essentially since 1995 when the Clintonoids got onto his affair, has not been a reliable conservative. They probably used the affair to blackmail him into not mounting an aggressive campaign against Clinton and, ever since then, he's essentially been a eunuch.

Exactly. I noticed that the 1993 'Republican Revolution' died once all those FBI files were discovered in the White House basement. Gingrich's neutering was amongst the most prominent.
I had mixed emotions when I heard about the crime, and I noticed its immediate fallout.
Sure, blackmailing is a dastardly crime - but on the other hand, do our congressfolks all have that much to hide? ... unfortunately that is a rhetorical question - I'm not requesting an answer.

72 posted on 04/10/2007 2:31:09 PM PDT by El Cid (Jesus said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes unto the Father, but by me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

“Last month, he revealed to Focus on the Family’s James Dobson that he had an extramarital affair on Dobson’s radio show.

Absolutely classless.”

Having an affair on the radio show seems excessively exhibitionistic.


73 posted on 04/10/2007 2:32:14 PM PDT by John Semmens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa; Chi-townChief

Republicans always wuss out on tough issues instead of trying to actually debate the issue. Look at the prescription drug benefit bill that will bankrupt America.

Newt has wussed out before (the government shutdown) and will always wuss out.

Maybe of our so-called leading candidates will wuss out on any big issue.


74 posted on 04/10/2007 2:36:49 PM PDT by Barney Gumble (A liberal is someone too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel - Robert Frost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa
I wonder if JFK would agree to debate Fred Thompson on global warming?
75 posted on 04/10/2007 2:37:04 PM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative (Eschew obfuscation, y'all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

As I have stated in the past Gingrich is a coward and a liar.


76 posted on 04/10/2007 2:37:57 PM PDT by YOUGOTIT (The Greatest Threat to our Security is the US Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

I recorded this on DVD and am watching it now

it is boring!


77 posted on 04/10/2007 2:41:04 PM PDT by RaceBannon (Innocent until proven guilty: The Pendleton 8...down to 3..GWB, we hardly knew ye...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YOUGOTIT
As I have stated in the past Gingrich is a coward and a liar.

That does it for me. I was a Newt supporter until this debate. Now he can go to hell for all I care. I have no respect for any man who would give in to the left on such an important issue.

78 posted on 04/10/2007 2:42:54 PM PDT by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa
In his first portion of allotted time Gingrich said there were two undisputed areas of scientific consensus on global warming: that the earth is getting hotter and the warming had been caused by human activity.

Actually the IPCC Clowns are only saying that it is "very likely" with a 90% probability of being human induced. So, it's not a closed case given the IPCC's 10% uncertainty.

79 posted on 04/10/2007 2:45:34 PM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

Well, hell. Is Imhofe running?


80 posted on 04/10/2007 2:47:14 PM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-210 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson