Posted on 09/12/2017 8:13:55 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Edited on 09/12/2017 8:30:48 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Carbon emissions will stop when scientists invent an affordable alternative, go whine at them to work faster and STHU about your stupid carbon tax.
One would think that the fact that this year the Pacific has been unusually quiet would present some problems for a thinking glowbull warmist.... oh wait, there are no 'thinking' glowbull warmists.
You're right... that's a pretty good sign that the article is a piece of crap. I just read it (so you didn't need to) and here is what I got out of it.... Conservatives should believe (or at least give tacit belief) in glowbull warmist propaganda because they are the business people who could benefit from 'fighting this phantom.'
It seems that peoples views toward manmade climate change do tend to coalesce and coincide with peoples views of liberalism and conservatism. Why is that? After all, the climate is branch of science and this is as much outside the realm of politics as is gravity. Whoever heard of somebody saying that I believe in the principle of F = MA only to have someone overhearing this say Do tell . I didnt know you were a conservative. It really is this goofy . It is quite rare to find a conservative giving more than a passing nod to any suggestions of manmade climate change while at the same time, it seems that its mandatory that all liberals proclaim that its irrefutable . Manmade climate change is an indisputable FACT.
I think that the reality of this dichotomy of views tells one all they need to know about the veracity of glowbull warming having anything remotely to do with science. It would seem that there are many reasons why the liberals are fighting tooth and nail for dealing with glowbull warming as a political issue . it perfectly buttresses and meshes with the rest of their political paradigm and objectives i.e. government control over everything, a bottomless pit of tax dollars to work with, brands corporations and the rich with being evil and the cause of all their problems etc etc. But why dont conservatives fight harder against it and in particular to refute the nonsense on scientific principles? My theory is that its mostly because of something that Rush has quite nicely articulated . Liberalism is a mental disease. If a person who is already mentally disturbed has gone off the deep end, does one try to reason with him/her, debate the facts of the matter or sit down with a coffee, a whiteboard and a computer to patiently explain the facts? Chances are that the alternative approach of simply ignoring the mental case is what one will do. This all works well until the mental cases have wrested control of the asylum
Conservative s can’t “fight climate change” and stay conservative.
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.