Newsweek vs Newsweek. This is the rebuttal in this weeks issue.
To: Eric Blair 2084
2 posted on
08/13/2007 10:00:18 AM PDT by
Sundog
(It's a good day for a catharsis.)
To: Eric Blair 2084
Robert Samuelson is a columnist, not a news reporter. He's rebutting a news story in his opinion column, and doing it very well, I might add.
I respect him a lot. He's not a conservative, but he thinks clearly and is very good at exposing illogic on both the right and the left. He's the son of Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Samuelson, and the quality of his analysis reveals that his daddy taught him well.
4 posted on
08/13/2007 10:04:14 AM PDT by
curiosity
To: Eric Blair 2084
...well, they’re admitting they are wrong and I guess that is something....
5 posted on
08/13/2007 10:04:48 AM PDT by
Tzimisce
(How Would Mohammed Vote? Hillary for President! www.dndorks.com)
To: Eric Blair 2084
A Time cover in 2006 was more alarmist: BE WORRIED, BE VERY WORRIED.
You don't get a much better example of the authoritarians lecturing to the perceived "little people" than this.
6 posted on
08/13/2007 10:05:39 AM PDT by
samtheman
To: Eric Blair 2084
Newsweek and the rest of the MSM would not know a moral crusade if it spanked them with the business end of a 2 by 4.
7 posted on
08/13/2007 10:06:19 AM PDT by
Weeedley
(Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.)
To: Eric Blair 2084
The bottom-line test to see if someone really believes that GW is caused by us and extremely dangerous is this:
Do you support increased nuclear power?
If your answer is no, then you aren’t really all that worried about AGW.
8 posted on
08/13/2007 10:07:16 AM PDT by
samtheman
To: Eric Blair 2084
The author still misses the point completely. He’s operating on the assumption that CO2 emissions are a problem, a premise that has been thoroughly debunked.
9 posted on
08/13/2007 10:08:06 AM PDT by
Squawk 8888
(Is human activity causing the warming trend on Mars?)
To: Eric Blair 2084
Samuelson loves to play the part of the realist curmudgeon. I sympathize with that, because often I feel like that's my role as an economist. I like this line:
One way or another, our assaults against global warming are likely to be symbolic, ineffective or both.
In fact, I would add that many of our assaults are in fact counterproductive, creating unintended consequences that will make the problem worse. See the ethanol boondogle.
To: Eric Blair 2084
Basic References:
Lawrence Solomon's "The Deniers" (a series of articles on the view of scientists who have been labelled "Global Warming Deniers"):
Other References:
11 posted on
08/13/2007 10:10:13 AM PDT by
sourcery
(fRed Dawn: Wednesday, 5 November 2008!)
To: Eric Blair 2084; Killing Time; Beowulf; Mr. Peabody; RW_Whacko; honolulugal; SideoutFred; ...
Kinda, sorta, might be a re-ping.
14 posted on
08/13/2007 10:12:29 AM PDT by
xcamel
("It's Talk Thompson Time!" >> irc://irc.freenode.net/fredthompson)
To: Eric Blair 2084
Robert Samuelson points out any REAL solution to global warming would impose costs Americans would likely find intolerable. And there's no chance the Third World will give up its goal to attain a First World living standard just to soothe guilty Westerners' environmental sensibilities. So in reality, the whole thing is over-promoted and over-hyped. I don't think global warming is real but on the offhand possibility it might be - my view is the human race will manage to adapt well to any climate change on this planet.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
21 posted on
08/13/2007 10:31:55 AM PDT by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: Eric Blair 2084
Global warming has clearly occurred; the hard question is what to do about it. Sure. It was 150 degrees in Chicago yesterday.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson